1911-01-13

FIRST READINGS.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 80) respecting the Buffalo, Niagara and Toronto Railway Company.-Mr. Lancaster.
Bill (No. 81) to incorporate the Canadian Northern Branch Lines Company.-Mr. Cash.
Bill (No. 81) respecting the Kettle River Valley Railway Company, and to change its name to ' The Kettle Valley Railway Company.'-Mr. Burrell.
13111 (No. 83) to incorporate the Simcoe, Grey and Bruce Railway Company.-Mr. Tolmie.
Bill (No. 84) respecting the Southern Central Pacific Railway Company.-Mr. Con-mee.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. FRANK OLIVER (Minister of the Interior) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 85) respecting Forest Reserves and Parks. He said: The House will remember that a Bill respecting forest reserves was passed in 1906. There was then in existence an Act respecting the Rocky Mountain park. The purposes of forest reserves and of forest parks, while identical in some respects, differ in other important respects. A forest reserve is withdrawn from occupation, whereas a forest park is intended primarily to be occupied for the purposes of pleasure. Since 1906 we have found that in many cases where a forest reserve was set apart, it was desirable that some portion, if not the whole of it, should be used for a park or other purposes. It has also been found necessary to increase the number of reserves, and that has been done by order in council. In other cases it has been found desirable on experience to cut out some of the reserves already made, or to alter their boundaries. This Bill provides a new schedule of forest reserves, which will be in accordance with the information we have acquired since 1906; and particularly it will include a forest reserve covering the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains which was set apart last year by order in council. It was not included in the Act last year for the reason that the boundaries had not been defined. It is difficult to define the eastern boundary, and it was thought better that it should be set aparfmerely by order in council instead of by Act of parliament. Since last year we have had an examination made, and while we have not

been able to define the boundary for the whole distance on the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains where it is administered by this government, we have been able to give what we think is a satisfactory eastern boundary, at any rate, as far north as the Jasper or Yellow Head Pass on the Grand Trunk Pacific line, and we are assuming a boundary from that point north. We think it is much better that, so far as we can define the boundary, it should be done by Act of parliament rather than by order in council. When we set apart a forest reserye by Act of parliament we take power in this Bill to apply certain provisions regarding parks, or parks in portions of this reserve set apart by Act of parliament, we take power to do this by order in council. The original reservation is made by Act of parliament, and there are certain provisions which cover that reservation. Out of that reservation there may be taken a portion which may be put under different regulations, so that the public may occupy that forest park for purposes of pleasure. One other new feature of the Bill is that we are providing powers of expropriation. In the present Act there is no power for expropriation of property which may be held by private individuals within an area that it is desired to make a forest reservation, or forest park. Sometimes we find a very serious difficulty in dealing with this question in the public interest, and we think it is desirable that a power of expropriation should be added to the existing provisions which provide for the purchase of existing rights either by payment or exchange.
Mr. HUGHES.: Suppose a railway wishes to pass through this forest reserve, or suppose a person holds timber limits in what is set apart as a forest reserve, how is the minister going to meet that case?


Mr. OLIVER.: Any rights that exist within the area covered at the time the park is set apart, are not intended to be prejudiced by the creation of the reserve. The holder of a timber limit still remains the holder of that timber limit, or the holder of private property still remains the holder of that private property. We are, as I say, taking powers of expropriation, not to expropriate such rights as timber limits or any Tights held by leasehold, but rights held by patent, those we take power to expropriate. In regard to railroads, if a railway runs by a certain route and that route includes a forest reserve, of course the park interest must give way to the paramount interest of the public in securing transportation.


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

[Stage Direction]
Mr. LEWIS moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 86) respecting the carrying of offensive weapons. He said: This is a combination of a number of Bills that have been introduced in this House and in the English House. Those introduced in the English House have been law for some years. The Bill is entitled ' An Act to amend the Criminal Code respecting offensive weapons and capital offences.' It reads as follows:
It shall he the duty of every peace officer to search any person whom he has reason to believe is possessed of the weapon commonly known as a dirk or bowie knife, or any weapon resembling it, or which is not of a character or kind calculated to he used solely for an inoffensive purpose, or any weapon known as a pistol or revolver; and if any such weapon is found in possession of such person, the peace officer shall forthwith take him before the nearest justice of the peace or magistrate, who shall proceed to investigate the facts'and, if the accused is by such justice or magistrate believed not to be a native of Canada, he shall make a report to the Minister of the Interior in the matter, together with the evidence; and, if the said minister is satisfied that such person was an immigrant to Canada within four years previously, and had in his possession any such weapon, or if such immigrant is found within four years of his arrival in Canada in possession of any such weapon, the said minister may order the deportation of such immigrant, and section 33 of the Immigration Act shall apply to the case.	_
Every vagrant, or loose, idle or disorderly person, may be searched for offensive or dangerous weapons.
Section 119 of the Criminal Code is amended by adding thereto the following subsection:-
No revolver or pistol shall be sold to any person unless he produces to and leaves with the vendor a permit, in writing, from the chief of police or a police magistrate or justice of the peace allowing him to purchase a revolver or pistol.
Section 120 of the said Code is amended by inserting after the word ' air-gun,' in the third line thereof, the words ' or any sheath knife, bowie knife, dagger, metal knuckles, skull cracker, revolver, razor or other offensive weapon.
Section 121 of the said Code is amended by idding at the end thereof the following words: -' or if convicted on indictment, to a like fine >r to imprisonment for any term not less than me year or more than five years, with or vithout hard labour.'
Section 123 of the said Code is amended by nserting the words ' revolver or pistol ' after *bo. word ' shot ' in the second line thereof.
This follows the English Act with reference to pistols:-
Any person who shall knowingly sell a pistol to any person who is intoxicated or not of sound mind, who, there is any reason to be-
[Stage Direction]
lieve, is going to use the same illegally, or to any person under the age of 18 years
[Stage Direction]
This extends the limit from 16 to 18 years :-
-shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding $50 or to imprisonment for not exceeding six months with or without hard labour or to both.
The English Act provides for a penalty of £50 and imprisonment for two years.
Section 274 of the said Code is amended by adding thereto the following subsection:-
Every one is guilty of an indictable offence, and liable to imprisonment for not less than two years and not more than five years, who unlawfully wounds or attempts to wound, or inflicts or attempts to inflict grievous bodily harm upon any other person with any revolver, knife, stiletto, razor, or other offensive weapon.
Section 1064 is amended by adding after the word ' judgment' in the second line thereof the words ' be taken to the nearest penitentiary prison and'
There is no one within reach of my voice who is conversant with what has taken place in Canada but will admit that there is reason for these amendments and that the government should deal with crime in a more forcible way than has been the case of late years. Formerly we could point with pride to our record with regard to criminal offences, while the reverse was the case in the great republic to the south of us. I have a number of newspaper clippings here with which I shall not trouble the House, but I shall merely refer to the head notes just to indicate what is happening in this Canada of ours. At one time the record of crime was very small in the whole of Canada. I am glad to say that in the maritime provinces and in the eastern paTt of the province of Quebec the former low average still holds good, but within the last three years the average of criminal offences in Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia has more than doubled. That, Sir, is attributable, as one can readily understand, principally to the great importation of foreigners, and, secondly, to the fact that crime has not been punished with the vigour which formerly characterized the authorities. As I said, I shall not take up the time of the House by reading all these newspaper extracts, but I shall place before hen. members two or three items particularly with reference to the offences of Italians and to the practice of people of that nationality of carrying concealed weapons and of using them upon slight provocation.
Brantford, May 15:

[Stage Direction]
Gang tries to Shoot up Blue Lake Neighbourhood.
Toronto Daily Star, October 14:

Mr. LEWIS.: The News, May 17:



KNIVES USED FREELY IN ITALIAN SCRAP.

[Stage Direction]
Quebec, January 3:

[Stage Direction]
Montreal, November 27:

[Stage Direction]
Another Victim of Montreal Knife Artists.
Fort Arthur, February 20:

Mr. F. H.: Keefer advises them to stop carrying Weapons.
Guelph, March 10:



GUELPH SHOOTING CASE.

[Stage Direction]
Italian named Sylvestro may be Fatally Wounded.
There are many others along the same line.
The Bill also applies to revolvers. I introduced this Bill some years ago, and objection was taken to it by the sporting papers on the ground that it was going to curb the sale of firearms. But, I would say in answer that a revolver is not used for sporting purposes in any shape or form. The revolvers that these men procure are chiefly bought at second hand shops around the ports where they enter the country. The foreigner who comes in from Italy, Russia or southern Europe, where they have no such things as revolvers and are accustomed to the use of the stiletto, sees, first upon landing, a line of revolvers displayed in a second hand store, and thinking that in this wild, new country he will need something of the sort, purchases one of these weapons. The first clause of the Bill asks parliament to prohibit foreigners from bringing these weapons into the country, and it also calls upon the authorities to notify them that they cannot carry them, and that if they are found with weapons within four years after their entrance they shall be deported. I have notices here from nearly every city in Canada with reference to this subject. The first one that I have is from the city of Winnipeg. There is also one from Hamilton. The grand jury in the cit>
of Toronto made the following presentment:-
Cases of murder and manslaughter are occurring with alarming frequency. We are of opinion that many of these are the result of the carrying of deadly weapons. We submit that strong measures should be taken to prevent this dangerous practice. We respectfully urge upon the authorities the necessity of making it the duty of police officers and constables generally to search at any time such persons as might be suspected of carrying concealed weapons, and that the person upon whom such weapons are found shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of not less than three months without the option of a fine.
If legislation is necessary to the granting of such power to police officers and constables.

we recommend tliat the required legislation be sought without delay.
There is no reason why any one in this country should carry a revolver. Even if this Bill should pass there is nothing in it to prevent a householder from getting a revolver for his own protection. But, any one who takes the list of murders which have occurred in Ontario, Manitoba and the west within the last two years cannot but admit that it is necessary that some such legislation as this should pass. I have here a cartoon in which the whole matter is summed up. It represents a drug store and a hardware store. This appears underneath the picture of the drug store:-
The law forbids the sale of certain poisons without a physician's order. The law regulates the sale of all poisonous drugs.
Then, underneath the picture of the hardware store:-
Persons of suicidal or homicidal tendency supplied with murderous weapons; no questions asked.
Why should not the sale of revolvers be restricted the same as the restriction of the sale of poison? I quote a letter to the Editor of the Toronto ' Telegram ':

[Stage Direction]
Sir,-The loose manner in which firearms are allowed to be displayed and sold in shops without proper restrictions speaks little for our boasted civilization. Accidents, suicides, murders, or some madman running amuck with a shooter make tragedies almost a daily occurrence.
The manufacture and sale of firearms should be entirely with the government of the country, their sale controlled by numbered license. This might do a lot to make crimes more detectable and restrain the needless carrying of firearms.
The government would do wisely to enact some measures rectifying the evil at the present session of parliament.
Here is an editorial article from the Toronto ' Star.'

[Stage Direction]
The revolver is a small gun suitable for carrying in one's pocket, contrary to law. As a firearm it is not of much use except in committing murders, and in helping highwaymen and burglars to frighten their victims.
It is of no particular use to hunters. For birds, men use the shot gun, and for animals, the rifle. In time of war the revolver proves exceedingly useful when a man is at close quarters with the enemy, but in time of peace it is used almost exclusively in assassinations and accidents.
Yet these weapons are manufactured and sold by the thousands in a country that is always at peace-or would be except for tragedies and inquests. Why not suppress the revolver? Why not regulate its sale? Why not punish with ten times the present severity the crook who goes about among men loaded with the machinery for doing murder ?
Now, Sir, I shall read to the Housa certain remarks made by Judge Holt of the United States Supreme Court. He says :
The repeating pistol is the greatest nuisance in modern life. Every criminal, every madman, every crank, every had boy carries one. Nineteen-twentieths of all the crimes of violence that are committed are effected by its use. All firearms are weapons whose us* involves such terrible injury that no one should he permitted to use them except strictly in self-defence. Every person engaging in the business of selling revolvers should he licensed, and every person who wishes to obtain a revolver should he required to first obtain a license. It sbou'ld be a serious offense for a dealer in firearms to sell a revolver to a person who has not a license authorizing him to have it.
I submit, Sir, that this is one of the Bills which the government should allow to be sent to a conimittej which would include amongst its members a certain number of the members of this House learned in the law, so that there may be thorough inquiry as to the extent of the abuses which this legislation is intended to remedy.
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. LEWIS moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 87) to prevent giving and taking secret commissions.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: Explain.


Edward Norman Lewis: This Bill which I now ask for leave to introduce is modelled on the English Act respecting the giving and taking of secret commissions, and its main provision is as follows :
1.	If any agent or employee corruptly accepts or obtains, or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain from any person for himself or for any other person any gift or consideration as an inducement or reward for doing or forbearing to do, or for having after the passing of this Act done or forborne to do any act in relation to his principal's affairs or business, or for showing or forbearing to show favour or disfavour to any person in relation to his principal's affairs or business; or if any person corruptly gives or agrees to give or offers any gift or consideration to any agent or employee as an inducement or reward for doing or forbearing to do, or for having after the passing of this Act done or forborne to do any act in relation to his principal's affairs or business, or for showing or forbearing to show favour or disfavour to any person in relation to his principal's affairs or business; or if any person knowingly gives to any agent, or if any agent knowingly uses with intent to deceive his principal any receipt, account or other document in respect of which the principal is interested, and which contains any statement which is false or erroneous or defective in any material particular, and which to his knowledge is intended to mislead the principal, he shall


Edward Norman Lewis: The chairman in moving the adoption of report and statement of accounts in March, 1910, said :
The more the committee had studied the subject the more vivid the prevalence of bribery came home to them. They found an amazing amount of corruption, some petty, some very serious.
Many employers considered their servants impeccable, while others did not care a jot what their servants did; but the public ought not to allow dirty things to go on in the servant's hall, the garden or the stable, any more than they would permit drunkenness or any other form of immorality.
Til sn, there is another reference here which might interest our Postmaster General. In the House of Commons on February the 20th, when a post office vote was under consideration one of the members stated with reference to mail carriers :
He felt that Xmas boxes were not only a tax on the public, but in his opinion it was a practice which lowered the British civil servants to have their salaries made up by touting around at a particular time of the year asking for gratuities.
Under the English Act, D. McLean was fined at Manchester 20 shillings and costs for giving a shilling to a carter of a railway company.
Now, Sir, the habit of tipping is a relic of the later middle ages. It arose from the masters wanting to give their serfs or servants small gratuities when they were sick or had large families, but which they were not entitled to. But when labour came to be organized and well paid and greater freedom prevailed, the practice of tipping went out of fashion. In Spain and Italy and other countries on the continent of Europe tipping is still so general that it is menial and impossible to do business without it. In England the same remark applies to the southeastern counties, where the farmers and people who live on a daily wage have not had their wages raised for over fifty years; but in the northern part of England, where labour is organized and men receive proper pay for their daily work, tipping has gone entirely out of use. In this country there are four classes to whom this Act will apply-waiters, coachmen, porters on railway trains, and barbers in cities. It has been recognized by the waiters' and barbers' [DOT] journeymen unions that where tipping is in vcgue men do not make as much as they would with a proper scale of wages. The barbers' union have started an organization to prevent tipping, and I will read to you the report of the secretary of that organization :-


Secretary L.   T.@: Von Fleet, of St. Louis, of the Barbers' Journeymen's Union of America, says, making open war upon the tipping system:-

I detest this tipping system. It is base, wrong, unjust and degrading, and the barber who willingly accepts ' tips J simply does so by bowing in humble supplication to receive them, because he has done or intended to do work for which he cannot demand a recompense. It is practised and encouraged to such an extent that wages have been decidedly lowered. It is more manly to earn your living than to receive charity or bribes. Large tips mean small wages. Proper wages no tipping.
Now, Sir, we are founding a nation here, tlic last great nation of the wotM. We who are here are assisting to lay the foundations, and we look forward to the superstructure showing one of the finest national edifices in the world. We cannot hope to see the fruition of our desires, but every one of us can feel that we have a share in the honour of laying the foundation- The foundation of any country is the manliness, straightforwardness and integrity of its citizens, and I say without any fear of contradiction that any man in Canada who is able to earn his daily wage is degrading himself and his family if he takes from any one what he is not entitled to and what he cannot by law compel that other to give him. When the four classes in this country who take tips organize and are paid a proper amount for their services they will find that they make more money than they do under the present system. And, Sir, the poor man who wishes to travel with a fair amount of comfort, and who does not want to pay an excessive sum for his sleeping car, or chair car, or any other comfort, cannot get the proper attention unless he pays something in addition to what the railway asks. I say that the railway corporation should pay all that the man who gives the service requires for the service. Tips on ocean steamships are a great hardship and injustice. I bring in this Bill in all earnestness. There may be some people who think that it is straining a point, but even these will admit that it is better to work for fair wages than fawn for favours. But when we consider from what it arose, I think there is no one who will deny that it will tend to manliness and to make every Canadian citizen what we hope he will be and what the majority of them are-a man not a serf. ,


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

Mr. GORDON (Nipissing).: Before the orders of the day are called, I would like to draw the attention of the government to the conditions now prevailing iii the Cobalt district owing to the dilatory policy of the Post Office Department. It is now nearly two years since the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario railway was completed to Cobalt, yet up to the present there is only one mail car running as far as
Englehart, which is 114 miles from Cochrane, the terminus of the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario at its junction with the Grand Trunk Pacific. At Kelso there is one bank, at Madison there is a bank, at Cochrane there are two banks, and at Porcupine five; and to show justification for my bringing this matter to the notice of the government, I might mention that at Porcupine alone there is laid the foundation for a great city.


Mr. SPEAKER.: I hope the hon. gentleman is not going into a discussion of the subject.


George Gordon: No, I only wish to justify my calling attention to it. All the money letters and others sent from Englehart north as far as Cochrane are at present simply thrown into a baggage car, which is a very loose way of handling such important matter. On the 15th December last I went down to the Post Office Department in order to press the necessity for a reform on the deputy Postmaster General, but he was ill at the time. I was, however, given to understand by his assistant that the matter would be taken up immediately, but until yesterday I heard nothing further about it. Yesterday I telephoned the department, and the assistant deputy told me that the deputy minister had gone west, and that nothing could be done until he returned, but that the deputy minister had given him to understand that something would be done. I would like to ask if, in view of the immense business done in that locality, whether it is not absolutely unbusiness like to allow such a condition of handling the mails to exist one day longer, and I would press on the government the necessity of having a remedy applied at once.



THE ST. ANDREWS DAM.

Mr. BRADBURY.: Before the orders of the day are called, I wish to make a correction in justice to the hon. Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley). On the 11th instant I drew his attention to the necessity of building a fishway at St. Andrews dam, and I said that I had a letter from the Department of Marine and Fisheries stating that they had information from the Public Works Department that a fishway was not necessary. I find now that I made a mistake. I have a letter in my possession. from the Marine Department signed by Mr. Stanton which says that the Department of Marine and Fisheries had investigated, and found that a fishway was not necessary, but not that they had received a letter-from the Public Works Department to that effect. I wish to make this correction in justice to the Public Works Department, as I understand the minister gave his word to th* consul general of the United States at

Winnipeg that this fishway would be constructed at once.



THE LONG SAULT DAM.

Mr. BOKDEN (Halifax).: Has the attention of my right hon. friend the Prime Minister been drawn to a report said to have been made by the American section of the International Waterways Commission with respect to the project of damming the St. Lawrence opposite Cornwall canal for power purposes? I see by the Montreal
Gazette ' of this morning that this report of the American members of that commission is dated November 1, 1910, but that it did not see the light until to-day. Here is what I find in the ' Gazette ':
The commissioners, who had been instructed by the State Department to report on the subject, asked the co-operation of their Canadian colleagues, but the latter declined on the ground that they wanted more time to study it from a Canadian standpoint. The commissioners declare that the project, if undertaken, -should only be as a government work, or at any rate under complete government control.
It is entirely possible/ the report says, ' that a scheme of this kind, if, carried out under proper government control, would be of great advantage to both the United States and Canada, Under proper plans the navigation of the river might be improved, while a large amount of cheap power would be created and made available for use on either side of the boundary. The government must have such [DOT]control of the works after their completion as shall insure tlieir permanency and their proper manipulation in the interests of navigation. Its control must be so complete that it may be doubted whether it can be secured without actual government ownership. It is in the interest of civilization that the St. Lawrence river, where it forms part of the international boundary, should not go undeveloped, either for navigation or power. If [DOT]the two governments could unite in a scheme for canalizing it at the public expense the problem would be solved in a most satisfactory way/ The commissioners go on to say, however, that the United States government has its hands full now in other expenditures, hence this scheme would have to be carried out by Canada alone or by private capital. The Bill now before congress brings the latter alternative under discussion, and the commissioners suggest the inclusion of several clauses designed to secure government control. One of the clauses which they ask to have inserted provides that half of the power developed shall be delivered for use in Canada.
I have no comment to make-it would not be in order for me to make any comment on this report art the present moment. I desire, however, to know whether or not the Canadian members of the International Waterways Commission have had this matter under consideration and have made a report upon it. It was alleged here that they did not agree in the report of the American members because they had not had


George Henry Bradbury: time .to consider the matter from the Canadian standpoint. But the matter has been more or less before the public for at least a year, probably for eighteen months, and one would have thought that within that period of time they would have had an opportunity of taking this very serious matter into consideration and of making their views upon it known to the government. I desire to ask, in the first place, if the report of the American members of the Commission will be laid upon the table of this House. I think it important that we should have it. In the second place, I would put the question to which I have referred,- whether the Canadian members of the Commission have made any report, and, if not, whether they have had the matter undeT consideration. I would like to know also if the government does not consider it a subject that these gentlemen should take into consideration and report upon. And further, I would like to know whether that report will be laid upon the table of the House as soon as it is made.


Six WILFRID LAURIER.: No Teport
has been received from the American commissioners upon this subject.


Robert Laird Borden: I am aware of that. They would make it to their own government.


Wilfrid Laurier: My hon.
friend (Mr. Borden, Halifax), asks if we would have this report brought before the 'House. If the American commissioners made a report, it was made to their own government. The Canadian commissioners have made no report upon the subject up to the present time.


Robert Laird Borden: Does the Prime Minister know whether they have had the matter under consideration for the purpose of making a report?


Wilfrid Laurier: I am not
aware that they have ; they may have had it under consideration or may not ; I am not aware. I can inquire, but, at this moment, I have no information on the subject.


Robert Laird Borden: Does not the Prime Minister think the matter of a sufficiently grave and important character to impel the commissioners to take it into *consideration and make some report ?


Wilfrid Laurier: I would not at this time pass any remark upon the conduct of the commissioners as to whether they have been diligent or not. I have no information upon the subject at this moment.
RETURNS-RECIPROCITY:	INTERNA-



TIONAL FISHERIES.

Mr. FOSTER.: I desire to call the attention of the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid

Laurier) to a return brought down within the past day or two in reply to am Address of the House, dated 7th December, 1910, calling for a ' copy of all petitions, memorials, resolutions from individuals, boards of trade or other bodies and corporations favouring or asking for a treaty of reci procity with the United States;' (That is one branch.) ' And also all similar documents protesting against or unfavourable to the same.' (That is the second branch.) 'And a copy of all correspondence had with the government, or any members thereof, concerning reciprocity with the United States since the 1st of January, 1910.' I have in this return an answer-and I suppose a partial answer-to only one of these, that is, the documents and petitions in opposition to reciprocity. I find none at all reported in favour of reciprocity. That may be because no petitions have been sent to the government in favour of reciprocity. But I find it Tather difficult to believe that there has been no correspondence with any member of the government with reference to reciprocity with the United States since 1st January, 1910. I think there must surely be correspondence of that kind. The Order of the House covers that. I would like to have it looked into, to the end, that I might get a full return.
And there is another which is more important. I asked for, and the House acceded to the request, ' a copy of Sir John Thompson's memorandum, on the question of the rights of fishing in the bays of British North America, prepared for the use of the British plenipotentiaries at Washington in 1888, and a copy of the treaty agreed to and approved by the president.' I got a copy of the treaty, but I am told with reference to the paper prepared by Sir John Thompson that it is not on file in the department. It is inferred that it is a confidential memorandum, and therefore not in the records. I am loath to believe that the Dominion of 'Canada has not these records of firstrate. importance which were made in the history of the negotiations of the treaty of 1888. It surely cannot be that we have not in our archives an important paper such as this, prepared by the Minister of Justice of that time on the question of the bays and inlet3 in the controversy between ourselves and the United States. If it is not in our archives, somebody ought to be called briskly to account. Our archives are not worth a snap of your finger if we do not preserve in them these important state papers. As to the idea that it is a confidential memorandum, I do not suppose that it will be said that this is true now. It was not confidential even at that time; it was a matter in the negotiations at Washington, and both sides to the controversy were cognizant of it. It was a very important document, as I well remember. If it was not presented to parliament at the time negotiations were on, it at once dropped out of the category of confidential memoranda when the negotiations were over. I think this paper must be in the records, and I would like to have the attention of the Prime Minister to the matter.


Wilfrid Laurier: With regard to the first request of my hon. friend (Mr. Foster) concerning the correspondence which may have passed between the government of Canada and the government of the United States since January 1, 1910, I suppose the reason it was not included in the return is that the correspondence has already been laid before parliament. All such correspondence was brought down by my hon. friend the Finance Minister last session, and by myself, I think, at the opening of this session.


George Eulas Foster: That is true with reference to the governmental correspondence, but not with regard to what was asked for.


Wilfrid Laurier: What is that?


George Eulas Foster: Correspondence had with the government or any member thereof concerning reciprocity with the United States. Just as the government would receive a petition from a board of trade on the subject of reciprocity, so they might get a letter from John Jones giving his view on the subject. That is the kind of correspondence, and there must be heaps of it on file somewhere.


Wilfrid Laurier: I thought that had been covered by the first part of the request.


George Eulas Foster: No.


Wilfrid Laurier: What is the first part?


George Eulas Foster: ' All petitions, memorials and resolutions.' These are formal. The right hon. gentleman understands it now.


Wilfrid Laurier: I will look into the matter. With regard to the second part of the hon. gentleman's request, relating to the memorandum of Sir John Thompson, I am not aware of such a record, but I will see if we have it. If it is not on file in the department, I agree, it should be in our archives. It may have been confidential at the time, but it has become historical, and there is no reason why it should not be brought down if it can be found.



FISHERIES IN INTERNATIONAL WATERS.

Mr. MIDDLEBRO.: The Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Brodeur) not

being present, I desire to ask the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) if the international regulations respecting fisheries in international waters have been agreed to and signed by the respective governments? If so, when are they to be brought into force? And, have the provincial authorities been notified thereof?


Wilfrid Laurier: I will give an answer to my hon. friend on this point on Monday.



SUPPLY-WHARF AT BRIGHTON.

[Stage Direction]
Sir WILFRID LAURIER moved that the House go into Committee of Supply.
["The people of St. Catharines wanted this building, and the man would be very unpopular who would ir.voke the law to prevent an expenditure ol $6,500 of civic money which would result in obtaining a public building costing $90,000 or more. Nevertheless, it is wrong, and the law of Ontario recognizes it as being against public policy, and makes it illegal to tax the people for any such purpose. That is the reason why I recommended the minister to consider whether he ought to accept these contributions. He cannot but see that it is apt to give rise to competition between municipalities for drill halls and other public buildings. One municipality might be the proper place for such a building, but the other municipality might say: We will get ahead of our rival by getting our lepreientative to offer the Dominion government a site. Such a thing ought to make no difference whatever, and I think the best way to settle it would be for the government to say: We wall insist on paying a reasonable price for the land upon which a public building is to be constructed.\nAt six o'clock, House took recess.\nAfter Recess.\nHouse resumed at eight o'c'ock."]
Mr. OWEN.: Before you leave the Chair, I want to ask the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley) if it is his intention to place this session, in the supplementary estimates yet to be brought down, a sum sufficient to build and complete a wharf at the village of Brighton in the county of East Northumberland, the riding I have the honour to represent in this House. This is not the first time I have brought the Brighton wharf to the attention of the minister. At the outset let me say that the Brighton wharf is not a government wharf. It is a very old wharf, and it is in a very bad state of repair. It was built by a private individual, and has always been owned by a private individual, and the government have not expended one dollar toy way of maintaining that wharf. It is true that I have stood up in the House and pleaded for the good people in my riding, and I do not think it should be necessary for any member to humiliate himself as I have done, pleading on behalf ot the people of my riding that the government should expend a little money that is greatly needed there. I claim that we have a right to it. This wharf is not a citizens' wharf, it is not a village wharf, but it is greatly dilapidated, and a new wharf would be in the interests of the farmers. Now, Sir, the farmers of this county have seen the revenue increase from $40,000,000 a few years ago to over $100,000,000 last year ; they *have also seen the expenditure of this country increased during the last 12 years from a little over $40,000,000 to $140,000,000 last year, and they are wondering where that large amount of money has been expended. The farmers in my riding are wondering why, when the government are expending so large an amount of money, they cannot get a small sum of five or six thousand dollars to build a new wharf in my riding that is greatly needed. No wonder the farmers come here five or six hundred strong when they know that this govern-, rnent is expending to-day $15 for militia and defence, in time of peace, for every $1 it expends in the interests of agricul-


William Sora Middlebro: ture. _ No -wonder the farmers are coming here in large deputations to make known their wants, and I will go further and say, to make known their demands to the government. An hon. gentleman said here the other day, looking at the members of the Cabinet : You may be thinking what you are going to do with us, but you had better be thinking what we are going to do to you if you do not come down and grant our demands. Now, Sir, the farmer is waking up, he is beginning to understand these things, he is beginning to see that this government expended three-quarters of a million dollars in the province of Ontario in the interest of agriculture, while the Dominion government only expended about three-quarters of a million, in the whole Dominion of Canada, in the interests of agriculture.
_ It is true that a majority of the electors in my riding lean to the Conservative party, but I do not think they should be punished for that. I would hate to think that the Minister of Public Works is punishing the farmers in my riding because a majority of them vote Conservative. If a majority of them did not vote Conservative I would not toe here to-day, and I know the minister is glad that I am here. But, Mr. Speaker, I am sincere about this matter. This wharf is used largely by the farmers. The farmers in that community are greatly interested in growing fruit, and every season they ship largely over that wharf to the markets of Canada. Therefore, the farmers wonder how it is that the minister will not expend six or seven thousand dollars on this wharf, when he has built a wharf not over seven miles away at a cost of six or seven thousand dollars, in my riding, and never a boat has gone in there yet, although it has been built from three and a half to four years. Two and a half years ago previous to the general 'election all sorts of promises were made, and the Minister of Public Works sent his engineer down from Toronto to inspect the wharf at Brighton. He made a thorough examination of the wharf, and condemned it. Everybody thought the government was going to build a new wharf, and the engineer recommended to the hon. gentleman that a new wharf ought to be built at Brighton, but nothing has been done. Now, 1 hate to think that that work has been put off because I have been elected to come here, I would hate to think that the minister is punishing the farmers in my riding because a majority of them have voted Conservative ; I would hate to think that, and I will not make that- charge against the minister unless he says it is true. I must say this also, that there is not one government building in my riding. Here is a wharf that is greatly needed, that would be in the interest of the people in that riding, and also in the interest of the

people of the Dominion of Canada. Now i appeal to my right hon. friend the Prime Minister, and I ask him here, in all sincerity : Does he think that the farmers of my riding have been treated rightly, and are .being treated rightly by his government in denying them that wharf? I put the same question to the Minister of Public Works : Does he think that he is treating the farmers in my riding rightly in denying them a new wharf? It would only cost five or six thousand dollars, the resident engineer has already condemned the existing wharf, and two and a half years ago recommended that a new wharf be built.


Mr. PUGSLEY.: The wharf to which my hon. _ friend refers is situated upon what is called Presqu' Isle bay. The harbour is a very capacious one, certainly it is a very excellent harbour of refuge. I have had the pleasure of visiting that harbour during the past season, and regretted very much that my hon. friend was not there. I should like to have shown him points in the harbour which attracted my attention. I am very glad to find that the hon. gentleman is waking up to the advantage of improving harbours and wharfs, and I trust that the spirit which he shows to-day may permeate the souls and the intellects of hon. gentlemen who sit around him, and that when I am asking for money to build necessary wharfs 1 may not. be charged with making large expenditures of public money, when perhaps it might be put to better use in other directions. I am a great believer, Mr. Speaker, in aiding the transportation of the country by building wharfs, and giving facilities to the farmers to get their produce to market. Now one difficulty about this wharf at Brighton Is, that it is a private wharf, it is owned by individuals, and when I was urged, as I was, by the gentleman who had the misfortune to be defeated by ,my hon. friend, to take over this wharf, it seemed to me that the price which the owners asked for it, was greater than I could recommend to my colleagues to pay for the property. I understand that now it seems to be apparent, that the property can be bought at a greatly reduced price from that which was first asked. I think I can say to my hon. >friend that, as a result of the visit which I paid to Brighton during the last season and the way in which I was impressed with the desirability of having improvements made there, if the wharf property can be turned over to the department at a low price, I should have much pleasure in submitting to my colleagues the question whether it shall be acquired, and the necessary improvements made.



Mr. NORTHRUP.: Before you leave the Chair, I would like to ask the right hon. gentleman who leads the House and controls the government, when he is prepare 1 to lay before the people of this country for their information, and before this House, as, I think I may say, an apology to this House and to bis colleagues as a justification for his treatment of the hon. the Secretary of State, an explanation why that hon. gentleman has been inhibited from attending on this cheerful pilgrimage that has been undertaken to Washington. It is only a short time ago when the members of this House were asked by the Secretary of State, or the right hon. Prime Minister, to join in adding to-I will not say-the increased cost of living-buit to the expense of this government by subdividing the department of the government Which was supposed by every one who is at all conversant with affairs in Ottawa to he ithe department that of all others had the least to do. Since that time an inquiry has been carried on at the Department of Public Printing and Stationery and we had laid before ns a few days ago a most interesting blue book that shows that although there, was practically nothing to do in that department, it had most assiduously set itself to work not to do even that. Well, it seems that it was deemed necessary a short time ago, by an Act creating a Department of External Affairs, that such a department should be formed. This Act provided that:-
The Secretary of State as head of the said department shall have the conduct of all official communications between the government of Canada and the government of any other country in connection with the external affairs of Canada, and shall be charged with such other duties as may be from time to time assigned to the said department by order of the Governor in Council in relation to such external affairs, or to the conduct and management of international or intercolonial negotiations, so far as the same may appertain to the government of Canada.
The words of the statute would seem to be reasonably clear, but the right hon. gentleman who ied the House placed the meaning beyond peradventure in the explanation which he gave when the Bill was before the House. I will not read his remarks in full, but they will be found in ' Hansard ' of March 4, 1909, pages 1980-81-82. The right hon. gentleman pointed out that:
All governments have found it necessary to have a department whose only business shall be to deal with relations with foreign countries, and in our judgment Canada has reached a period in her history when we should follow the example of other countries in that res-

pect, as, for example, tlie commonwealth of Australia.
Then the right hon. gentleman proceeded to say that we had a Department of Interior for internal affairs, a Department of Marine and Fisheries for marine and fishery affairs, and that Canada, now having reached the status of a nation must, along with her sister nations, also have a department to conduct the external affairs of Canada. The House evidently relied on the argument advanced by the right hon. gentleman, and this Bill to create this department was passed. Now, within a year or two of the establishment of that department one of the most important pieces of negotiation that this government has attempted since it came into power-the reciprocity negotiations between this country and the neighbouring state-is undertaken. Although two ministers are deputed to visit Washington to negotiate with our neighbours, and although four of their colleagues find it convenient to be there at the same time, possibly to assist-at all events being there, they are able to assist-the one gentleman who apparently was constituted by parliament, to conduct these external negotiations, is the one who is left at home. I think it was the right of this House to expect, having acquiesced in the demand that such an office should be created, that when an opportunity for something to be done by this office, it should be done. Practically we find the office of the Department of External Affairs relegated to the position of a mail registering office. I suppose that any two or three of the pages who might not be occupied during the recess could discharge all the duties which apparently are the only duties which that department is considered competent to discharge; that is to file away the letters received from other departments, for surely, if the letters received by that department are answered by the department, then the officials of the department must have a better knowledge of what is going on touching matters referring to any such correspondence than outsiders. Therefore, it seems extraordinary that when the first opportunity occurs to give the department a chance to justify its existence we again have the old, old story, because when we come to test the reality of the promises made with regard to various expenditures by this government, and ask about them, the only justification we can get is that somebody got the money.
The hon. gentleman (Mr. Murphy) who fills the position of Secretary of State, I am sure, would not only have contributed to the success of the negotiations as far as Canada is concerned, but I am likewise sure, if I may judge from the interesting literature which he has laid before the Mr. NORTHRUP.
House in the last few days, that he could even have contributed to the gaiety of nations by his suggestions at such a time. If that hon. gentleman had gone to Washington with his colleagues, and if he had brought the same genial humour, the same sense of the eternal fitness of things, to bear upon our American cousins, who are proverbially fond of humour, as that which we find displayed in the investigation into the affairs of the Public Printing and Stationery Department, I am satisfied that most beneficial results would have followed. Who could have resisted the appeal that he might have made to our American cousins along the line of that which he addressed to the unfortunates who were brought before him in connection with this inquiry? If the House has any curiosity it can look at page 251 of this report.


An hon. MEMBER.: Read it.


William Barton Northrup: No, life is short, probably two hundred gentlemen will read it over more than once and they will get two hundred times the amount of satisfaction spread over two hundred times the length of time that they would if I were to read it but once. When we remember the hon. gentleman's wonderful sense of logic, I think it is unfair that the country should be deprived of his services at Washington. Just think of the irresistible effect that would be produced by such logic as that which appears in this report. When the report of that investigation comes before the House, as it will, I think it will puzzle the House to know what sort of description should be given to the bureau. Sometimes one would think it was the head office of the Shylocks and sometimes one would think that it was the head office, or a branch, of the Keeley Institute. Almost every possibility is covered by the reality in connection with that department. Of course, the hon. gentleman had before him the various foremen and he asked them to explain about the liquor that was used in the department and the most shocking tale seems to have been told when foreman after foreman had to admit that so many of his men were addicted to the use of the seductive beverage that one wonders, how any work was done at all. But the hon. gentleman was prepared to discountenance this and he laid down the rule again and again in the same terms that in the future it must be understood that any man who came to his work under the influence of liquor would be suspended for a week without pay, and that if he came a second time he would be dismissed from the department altogether. He displayed that keen sense of justice that I would like to have seen brought to bear upon the negotiations at Washington. In order that no one's feelings should be unnecessarily hurt, while impressing upon

the foremen that any man who came the first time under the influence of liquor should be suspended for a week without pay and should be dismissed for a second offence, he was careful to instruct the foremen, and to point out that this rule, severe as it was, should not apply to any one who did not use liquor. It is a pity that we should not have had the same logic, the same wit, the same humour, brought to bear upon these negotiations, for no one can tell now what will be the result of it. Therefore, I feel justified in appealing to the right hon. First Minister on behalf of the members of this House by whom he was influenced and to whom there is an apology due, for having induced them to pass this legislation which he, himself, has not only ignored, but made absurd and useless by declining to send the man to Washington whom he should have sent, and I also think that the right hon. gentleman should apologize to the nations of the world because the gaiety of nations has been so much decreased by the unfortunate absence of his colleague the Secretary of State from Washington.


Mr. BOYCE.: I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Labour (Mr. King) whether the commission on technical education has completed its work. If it has not completed its work how much more lies ahead of it in the shape of visits to different places in Canada? Not very long ago the minister was able to state that the commission would pay a visit to northwestern Ontario and hold a session there. I see that although a requisition was sent to the commission no dates in Algoma have been fixed where there is a great deal of information along the line of that which the commission is anxious to obtain. I would, therefore, ask the hon. gentleman, if, the itinerary of commission has been completed why no sitting has been held in the town of Sault Ste. Marie, which the minister himself said was a centre in which that commission might obtain valuable evidence. If the commission has not completed its work will it hold a sitting at Sault Ste. Marie? If not, why not?


Mr. KING.: The chairman of the commission informs me that he has been in communication with the municipal authorities of Sault Ste. Marie and Steelton, and has made an arrangement about the commission visiting there. The commission has a very extensive field to cover, and it was the intention to visit Sault Ste. Marie early in December, but that could not be carried out. I understand the commission will go there some time during this month or in the month of February. I may say to my hon. friend that it is a little difficult to say how
long it will take the commission to com-piete its work. One part of its mission is to take evidence as to conditions in Canada, and the other to visit foreign countries and to see how needs similar to ours have been dealt with. The first part of the work has been about completed, with the exception of the visiting of a few localities. The commission is at present in Ottawa preparing a tentative interim report which will soon be ready. Its visit abroad will probably last several months, and on its return its final report will be prepared and presented.


Arthur Cyril Boyce: Will the commission visit Sault Ste. Marie before it goes abroad?


George Gerald King: I understand that to be the intention. When I was at Sault Ste. Marie I wrote to the chairman of the commission and he answered that three members _ of the commission would visit there. I replied that I thought it was important that all the commissioners should attend at Sault Ste. Marie. The chairman was unable to get all the members of the commission to go there before Christmas. He has, I understand, completed arrangements to visit Sault Ste. Marie with the full commission.


Mr. WRIGHT.: The commission has visited several places in southern and central Ontario, where the conditions are identical, and they have absolutely ignored the northern part of the province. I think I am safe in saying that between Orillia and Cochrane no point has been visited by the ccmmission, and it would seem as if it were mere a matter of personal convenience to them than of obtaining information with regard to the conditions in different localities; otherwise the northern portion of Ontario would have been given some consideration. In northern Ontario we have lumbering and tanning industries, and mining industries, and we have agricultural interests, with regard to all of which the conditions are different from those which obtain in the southern portion of the province. It would have been well had the commission held three, or four, or half a dozen sittings in northern Ontario.


George Gerald King: It is largely left to the commission to decide as to what localities they ma\ desire to visit. The chairman of the commission has indicated to me that'if any members of the House feel that industrial centres in their localities should be visited, and will so inform him, he will endeavour to arrange that these localities should be visited before the commission concludes its work. The commission has had an eye to economy, and on that account some localities have not been visited, the commission believing that in the larger centres they might obtain sufficient information to guide them. I am quite sure the commission

wculd be glad to visit any locality where there is reasonable ground for believing some good purpose may be served by their doing so.


George Gordon: I have no apclcgy to offer to the House for taking up a little further time on the subject I have already spoken of. On December 14 I received the following letter from the superintendent of the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario railway:-
Mr. George Gordon, M.P.,
Parliament Buildings,
Ottawa, Ont.
Dear Mr. Gordon.
Would you mind calling upon the Deputy Postmaster General and ask him for a mail car to be run north of Englehart?
The amount of money going forward to the four banks in Porcupine, one at Hatheson, one at Kelso and two at Cochrane, as well as the individual letters containing sums of money, makes it of great importance that the mail car be handled north, and in charge of competent mail clerks instead of being put in our baggage cars as is now done.
Have asked the Deputy Postmaster General on several occasions to give this matter attention. Have written him, but lately have not been successful in getting any replies.
Would like to have you call upon him, and get some information for me.
Tours very truly,
(Sgd.) J. H. BLACK, Superintendent.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I have never gone to the Postmaster General to ask him for anything which was not in the interest of the district which I represent, as well as the country at large, nor will I ever do so. Here is something which should not be asked for, but which any ordinary business man would see for himself should be done at once. Has it come to pass that because the Postmaster General is absent from the country and the Deputy Postmaster General has been called away on business to another part of Canada, that the machinery of the Post Office Department must stand still? It is a matter of serious moment to have the enormous sums of money which are passing to and fro beween Englehart and Cochrane and Porcupine cared for in no better way than to throw them into an ordinary baggage car. I want to ask the government now if it is their intention to put a proper mail car on that route, and if so will it be dene at once?


Wilfrid Laurier: Although the remarks of my hon. friend from Nipissing are somewhat heated, the House will be glad to hear that his district is improving so fast that the machinery of government is not equal to affording it necessary facilities. The Cobalt district is of comparatively recent development, and he, Mr. KING.
himself .has named several towns which a few years ago were not in existence and *which to-day are prosperous and doing a large business. He has told us that there are two or three banks at Cochrane and at other places along the line. That seemed to be a very good reason why that new section of the community should be served by all the facilities, postal and others, which the government can furnish for the diffusion of the ordinary knowledge necessary to its development. If that has not been done, I would be sorry to believe, as my hon. friend seems to imply, that it was through the negligence of the department. As he knows, the Postmaster General has been away, and will be here in a few days; and the deputy has been obliged to go to British Columbia on matters connected with the department, so that the force in the department is inadequate to deal with all requirements. But my hon. friend will perhaps believe that if the service has not yet been organized, it is not through any lack of good will or through any incapacity on the part of the government. . But my hon. friend knows that there aTe some rules on ttys matter. It is not sufficient that an application should be sent to the government to have it granted at once. My hon. friend knows that all such applications have to be looked into. The inspector has to be sent over the premises aid to make a report, and upon his report the minister or the department will decide. As my hon. friend attaches some importance to the matter, I will make it my duty at once to have inquiry made into it again, and on Monday, if it is called to my attention, I think I shall be able to satisfy him one way or the other as to the merits of the application to which he has referred.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House went into Committee of Supply.
William Pugsley: I would like to say, for the information of my hon. friend from the city of St. John, that in his absence last evening it was understood that under item '138 any question might be asked with regard to any public building in the maritime provinces.


Mr. DANIEL.: I do not desire to ask anything very important. I wish to ask to whom has been awarded the contract <for the building of the drill hall, the price, when it will be finished, and whether the teontract will include everything that will be required for the building. In looking over yesterday's ' Hansard I notice that the minister stated that the contract would soon be awarded, but the Montreal ' Gazette ' contains a rumour that it has already been awarded.


William Pugsley: I may say that I have signed a recommendation to council, but

it is not customary to give the name of the lowest tenderer until the contract has actually been awarded, and I would not like to depart from that rule in this case. J will not, however, deny the accuracy of the rumour my hon. friend refers to as having appeared in a Montreal paper. My understanding is that the contract will include all the fixtures-heating, wiring and plumbing. As to when the building will be completed, I am unable to state, because the contract has not yet been signed. The chief architect will report the time, that in his judgment, will be reasonably necessary to complete the building, and that time will be inserted in the contract.


John Waterhouse Daniel: As the minister states that the rumour published in the ' Gazette ' is Probably correct, the matter is practically concluded, so that I do not see that there is much object in keeping the information back any longer.


William Pugsley: That is the rule. In
fact, it would be discourteous to His Excellency for me officially to announce that an order in council had passed until it has actually passed and has received His Excellency's signature. I can say to my hon. friend that if the order in council passes, as I assume it will, the successful tenderer iwill be invited to sign the contract immediately, so that the work will be proceeded with, with the least possible delay.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Another question I wish to ask the minister regarding the roadway and pavement at Fredericton. The amount paid by the government, including the vote passed yesterday, is stated in ' Hansard ' to be $4,800. What proportion does that bear to the whole cost of the roadway and pavement ? Is it half, or more than half, or less than half ?


William Pugsley: It is one-half the total cost.
Artliabaska public building, $15,000.


William Pugsley: This is to pay the contractor. Of this amount $10,000 is a revote. Pursuant to an appropriation last session, tenders were called for the work, and a contract entered into and the contractor is going on with it. The contract price is $22,000. The total cost of the building, in eluding the site and the fittings, furniture, lock boxes, sidewalks and fencing, is estimated by the chief architect at $34,500.


Mr. LANCASTER.: What is the size of the place?


William Pugsley: The population in 1901 was given at 995.	[DOT]


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the postal revenue?


William Pugsley: The postal revenue is $2,334, money orders issued $10,300, money orders paid $18,937. Arthabaska is a shire town, and in addition to a commercial college, convent and hospital, contains quite a number of factories, also a tannery, two saw mills and a flour mill.


Mr. BLAIN.: Was this put up to public competition?


William Pugsley: Five tenders were received for the work, and the contract includes heating and electric wiring. I cannot say whether the fittings and letter boxes will be let by tender or not-probably not, but as far as possible we call for tenders.


Richard Blain: Any clock in this building?


William Pugsley: No.


Mr. LALOR.: What is the guide followed in building post offices. Does the postal revenue form a basis?


William Pugsley: Usually the postal revenue is proportionate to the population, but not always. For instance a town which might be composed almost exclusively of residences would not have the same postal business as a business centre of the same population. The population and revenue, however, are elements which are considered. There may be towns which ordinarily would be entitled to public buildings, but which may enjoy sufficient postal accommodation. For instance the postmaster may have rented and fitted up a very suitable building, and thus the toifrn may have all the reasonable postal accommodation it requires. In such cases we would not consider favourably a request for a public building. There is no fixed rule, but, as I said the other day, we give in the first place more favourable consideration to a request from a shire town, as we rather recognize that each county is fairly entitled to one public building and prefer to give that building to the county town rather than to any other. But of course there may be exceptions because it may happen that a county town is not nearly as important as another in the same district.


Francis Ramsey Lalor: Judging by the list of towns which are given public buildings, I should say that neither postal revenue, nor population is considered; but what I do notice is that in one of the Ontario towns where the hon. minister is building a post office, and which is represented here by a supporter of the government, the population is but 205. Yet he is putting up a building there to cost $15,000.


William Pugsley: What town is that?


Francis Ramsey Lalor: Tilbury.


Mr. CLARKE (Essex).: Where does the hon. gentleman get his population?


Francis Ramsey Lalor: From the census returns.


Alfred Henry Clarke: My hon. friend is wrong. It is one of the best towns in centre Ontario.


Francis Ramsey Lalor: What is the population?


Alfred Henry Clarke: It is an incorporated town, so that its population must exceed 205.


Francis Ramsey Lalor: What is the population?


Alfred Henry Clarke: Between 2,000 and
3,000.


William Pugsley: The figures in the census must be a misprint.


Francis Ramsey Lalor: Possibly, but in looking over the list, I find that the hon. minister has overlooked towns with three or four times the population, and five or six times the postal revenue of those where he is building post offices, and in these larger towns he is not doing anything. But practically all these small places on which he lavishes his gifts, are represented by government supporters.


William Pugsley: The hon. gentleman makes a general criticism, and a general criticism is easily made. But when an item comes up for a public building in a particular town, if the hon. gentleman ia sincerely of the opinion that a public building should not be erected there, he ought to vote against it. I do not find, however, that he voted against a public building, even for the town of Tilbury, although he thought its population was "only 205.


Richard Blain: What effect would that have?


William Pugsley: It would put him on record as opposed to that particular public work.


Richard Blain: But what effect would it have on the government?


William Pugsley: One never can tell. Does my hon. friend not think that after all that would be much more effective criticism than this general condemnation. The hon. gentleman made a general criticism and then he instanced one place which he thought only had a population of 205, but when he found that its population yras between 2,000 and 3,000, of course he had nothing more to say. No doubt there are many places which might fairly be entitled to a public building. In many cases there may be one or two buildings in the same county. Or it may be that the town already has good postal accommodation. I have in mind one case. Application was made to me by a delegation from a very thriving Mr. LALOR.
town in the province of Ontario. They said : We are at the gateway of a splendid country through which many thousands of tourists pass every year, and it would be a fine thing if we could have a public building in which we could take pride and which our people would be proud to show to visitors. 1 was favourably impressed. But afterwards it was represented to me that while it would be nice to have a public building there it was not absolutely required in the public interest. The postmaster at an expense to himself of about $1,200 had provided a building and fitted it up very nicely for the accommodation of the public, and it was represented that if we put up a public building he ought to be reimbursed for his expenditure.


Richard Blain: What county?


William Pugsley: In Muskoka.


Richard Blain: Ah !


William Pugsley: What's the matter?


Richard Blain: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Pugsley) knows what's the matter.


William Pugsley: No. I am sure the hon. gentleman will not criticise that position. I have a vote for a fine wharf on Lake Muskoka in the district represented by the hon. gentleman sitting opposite me (Mr. Wright). I hate to tell how many things I am doing for constituencies represented on the other side for fear my friends on this side may feel that I am doing almost too much for these gentlemen. My friends on this side are very patient ; they do not abuse me because I cannot do everything in' a day or a year ; they are willing to wait reasonably for public expenditures. I try to meet their views as rapidly as possible, and I hope I shall be able to meet the reasonable expectations of their constituents. We do not limit expenditures to constituencies represented on this side of the House, and I am sure the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Blain) does not mean what that ' Ah ' would imply.


Richard Blain: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Pugsley) soon gathered what it did imply.


Francis Ramsey Lalor: 
Mr. CROTHERS.: It seems to me that the system adopted by this government in regard to public buildings is absolutely corrupt and degrading. Perhaps, I should say 53J
the want of system, for there seems to be no system except that of strengthening the government's hands in the various constituencies. Yesterday, we had the case of a large expenditure being made in a little village of seven hundred inhabitants, though you could find a score of towns in the province of Ontario that are more important that have no public building. To-day, we have a proposition to expend a large sum of money in a little village of 900 inhabitants in Arthabaska. The figures have not been given us, but I fancy that the net revenue from these places is very small, if there is any net revenue at all. Now, I hold that a rule or principle ought to be laid down by the government as to the circumstances in which a public building will be erected. When these circumstances are met, when the rule made or the principle adopted is complied with, then the building should necessarily go up. It is obvious to every member of this House the system or want of system followed by this government is a degrading and a corrupting influence on the people of this country. They see a little place like Hartford down in Nova Scotia, with 700 inhabitants, getting $16,000 for a public building. People say, the government is spending millions, and we might as well get a part of it as some other place, and then they ask their member to get as much money as he can out of the government for their little village or town. The member is actually forced to come to the Minister of Public Works, and upon his knees to beg of him to spend a few thousand dollars in his little town, when the expenditure could not be defended upon the around of principle or the ground of public necessity. I say it should not depend upon the fact whether a constituency sends a supporter of the government here or a gentleman in opposition to the government. This lack of system has been going on for years and years, and is exercising a corrupting influence upon the people from ocean to ocean. It is high time that it should be stopped, that some principle should be adopted, that some rule should be laid down, and when the officers of the department determine that these conditions have been met, then the public building should go up as a matter of right, if there is money in the treasury for that purpose. If there is not enough money, then the places where the specified conditions exist should take their turn. Now I hope that verv shortly we shall see an end of this log rolling here for improvements of this kind) and that a man should not be (Tenied a necessary improvement because he cannot bring to bear the necessary political influence. At present we see deputations waiting upon the Minister of Public Works begging him to do this or that for their little town or village and if sufficient political pressure can be brought to bear

upon the minister the request is granted. Yesterday we had a little town thirteen miles from the shire town-my hon. friend throws that in at every opportunity, that it is a shire town. Well, we had a little place down in Carleton, thirten miles from the shire town of Woodstock, a little village of 700 inhabitants, getting an expenditure of $16,000, with no justification whatever for it. It is high time such expenditures should cease.


Mr. WEIGHT.: As the minister has seen fit to mention the deputation from a town I represent, I gather from what he said that he does not intend to comply with the views of the deputation from the town of Bracebridge, on account of the postmaster having made some improvements there.


William Pugsley: No, I said that representations had heen made that the postmaster was providing a very good accommodation at a considerable expense, and that a public building is not immediately required.
I did not say what conclusion I had reached on the subject, because the matter is under consideration.


William Wright: I may say to the minister that I am personally acquainted with that town, I am personally acquainted with the postmaster, and cognizant of the conditions of the post office. The postmaster has done the best he can fox the public with the limited space at his disposal, but the post office even to-day is not up to the requirements of the town. It is an important town, what the minister terms a shire town, yielding a revenue of over $7,000, a much laTger revenue than is afforded by dozens of other places that are being supplied with public buildings. We have not a public building in the district of Muskoka oi any kind. It is true that the minister has been promising a wharf, and I hope he will proceed during the coming season to erect it. It has been promised now for a good many years, we have had' votes from time to time, and I am looking forward to the time when these prc mises will be fulfilled. I hope the minister will put up the wharf that he has promised there. At the same time, I may say that I think the district of Muskoka, which is pretty well settled, a very large district, with three towns in it, having a postal revenue of over $5,500 each, should receive better consideration, and that these places should be provided with public buildings, if it is the policy of the ministei to go on with the erection of public buildings throughout the country. I have long been of the opinion that there ought to be some system laid down with regard to this matter, that, for instance, the towns with the largest postal revenue should first be provided, no matter in what nart of the Dominion they are to be found, and so on ^ down the line. In that way public build-Mr. CKOTHERS.
ings would be erected in important centres where the revenue from post office and customs warrant it. If that system were laid down and followed, I cvould make no complaint on behalf of my riding, knowing that it would receive consideration in its proper turn. At present it does seem to me that some important towns are being side-tracked *without justification. I think the Minister of Public Works might adopt some system in concert with the Postmaster General, who should say to the Minister of Public Works where a post office ought to be erected, and that the system should be brsed upon the gross revenue derived, unless there is some special reason to the contrary.
Aylmer post office, $3,000.


William Pugsley: This is for the purpose of making certain improvements to the post office at Aylmer, in the province of Quebec. We propose erecting an addition of two stories, and the contract is actually let. The total estimated cost will be $6,000, according to the chief architect. It is an extension to the present building.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What did the present building cost?


William Pugsley: The total expenditure on the present building up to the 31st of March, 1910, was $18,184.51, of which $4,997 have been for repairs.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I have been there, and I noticed that the building seemed to be a pretty good one for the size of the place. I am curious to know why it needs enlarging in view of the size of the place.


Mr. DEVLIN.: Let me say a word, as this is in the county I represent. This building was erected when Sir HectoT Langevin was Minister of Public Works, and there have been practically no repairs made to it for about 17 years. At the back of the building there is a kitchen, which was very badly built, a building of one low stcrv, in which it was impossible to live during the winter time. Repairs here are absolutely needed. Some of the first persons to bring the matter to my attention were good, staunch Conservatives in the town of Aylmer, and it has absolutely no political significance.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The statement of the hon. gentleman is different from that of the Minister of Public Works, and I would not have made any comment had the minister said what the hon. gentleman has just said.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: He said just the same.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The minister said that it was extending the building.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: There is an addition.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Well, it is extending the building, it is not repairing an old building, and I want to know what it is?


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: It is really both.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: That is not what the hon. gentleman said. He said that it was
because the building had been improperly built and the kitchen behind it. I did not know that post offices and kitchens were associated. Perhaps it is a soup kitchen, I do not know what it is. However, as the member says it is a matter of repairs, and the minister said it was an extension, it seems to be both. I want to know how much is new building, and how much is repairs to the old building?


William Pugsley: 
Richard Blain: Was that voted last year?


William Pugsley: Yes, this is a revote of $3,000.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the amount to be spent?


William Pugsley: The total estimated cost is $6,000.


Richard Blain: What was voted last year?


William Pugsley: $5,000 was voted last year.


Richard Blain: Has any work been done?


William Pugsley: Yes, we will have expended up to March 31, $2,000 upon the work, and we are only asking for a revote now of $3,000.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the population of Aylmer?


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: It is over 2,000 and in the summer months about 3,000.


Richard Blain: Why did my hon. friend allow this building to go to rack so long?


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: Had it been properly constructed in the first instance it certainly would not have required these additions, but it was constructed by Sir Hector Lan-gevin, and the architect employed by the government-I am not sure whether Mr. Ewart was there then-may not have been as expert as they are to-day. I_am not in the habit of asking the government to expend any money upon public buildings unless I am assured it is absolutely necessary, and I can assure hon. gentlemen that this is money which is properly required for the repair of the building.


Richard Blain: Here is a building that was constructed many years ago. My hon. friend was hoping to be able to complain against the former architect but he finds that it is the same architect.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: No, no, the contractors.


Richard Blain: Here is a building that has required repairs for so many years. Last year they asked for $5,000, and now they are asking for $6,000. It appears to me that if the hon. gentleman had taken care oi the public interest this building would have-been repaired some years ago, possibly at a cost of $2,000. It took my hon. friend about:, fourteen years to find out that something had gone wrong under the old government,, and now he is going to cure it with an expenditure of $6,000.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: It seems to me that it would be well for the minister to give us some further details as to how he proposes to expend this $6,000 because it will go out to the country that he is expending this $6,000 to repair the caretaker's kitchen. Most of us are unable to get -a whole house that is worth that. It would look rather -bad to have it appear that they were fixing up a kitchen at an expense of $6,000.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: There are the repointing of the building and general repairs. I think the best I can do is to charter a Hull electric, car and invite my hon. friends out, because I can then point to the necessity of -this work.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I can tell the hon. gentleman that without his chartering any .cars some of his friends had the curiosity to go out there years ago, and one of the first things that struck them was the enormous size of that public building compared with the sparse and meagre population of the town. If such towns were given a post office in proportion to population and revenue $6,000 would build the whole public building and not merely repair the caretaker's dining room and kitchen and install some electric lights. The hon. gen, tleman may not have said anything until

he thought it was necessary, but when he did say anything to the government he seems to have got in one chunk about ten times more than was necessary to provide for the propeT carrying on of the public affairs of the town.


Richard Blain: What was the original cost of the building ?


William Pugsley: There has been expended on construction $18,184.
Dominion public buildings-renewals, improvements, repairs, &c., $20,000.


William Pugsley: This is the usual vote for public buildings in Quebec.


Mr. PEELEY.: How much of the vote was spent last year ?


William Pugsley: 


George Halsey Perley: Would not the item for the town of Aylmer naturally come out of that vote ?


William Pugsley: No, that would be too large.


George Halsey Perley: Is this amount of $20,000 spent in small sums ?


William Pugsley: Yes, running from $15 up to $2,600. They are small items extending over thirty or forty different buildings.
Grosse Isle quarantine station-improvements and repairs to buildings and fittings, furniture, &c., $7,000.


William Pugsley: These are asked for by the Minister of Agriculture.


Richard Blain: I notice an expenditure at this point last year. My hon. friend will find at page V-36 of the Auditor General's Eeport
Emond, V. A. & Son: 4-in. water filters, 2 at $700 ; connections for same, $475-$1,875.


William Pugsley: The Minister of Agriculture perhaps could explain as to that.


Mr. FISHEE.: These are quite large, expensive and complicated machines which are required to purify the water at Grosse Isle for the patients in the hospital and were ordered under the direction of Dr. Montizambert. I was surprised myself at the cost of them, and when I came to look into it, I found that there were no other machines that could be obtained. These could not be obtained at any lower price and when one sees the machines he can easily understand that they cost as much as they do.


Richard Blain: Where were they made ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: In Montreal, I think.


Richard Blain: Did you invite public competition for them ?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: 


Sydney Arthur Fisher: There is no competition; they are a patented article. The physicians in charge of the department recommended them as being the only ones useful for the work.


Richard Blain: Is the only filter made in Canada made in Montreal?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: The only one of that character.


George Halsey Perley: Where is the water supply for Grosse Isle obtained?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: It is St. Lawrence water which at that point is brackish.


George Halsey Perley: Is the drinking water taken from the St. Lawrence river?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I am not positive whether the drinking water is not obtained from a well.


George Halsey Perley: I understood the minister to say that this filter was for the purpose of filtering the water for drinking purposes. If that water comes from the St. Lawrence it would have to be distilled, and would not need to be filtered.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I don't think that water is used for drinking purposes, but I would not be positive. I think the filtered water is for the general supply of the quarantine station.


Richard Blain: Was there any filtering system prior to this?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I cannot remember.
Grosse Isle quarantine station-new buildings, $50,000.


William Pugsley: The Minister of Agriculture can give information as to this.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Last year one of the buildings which was about 40 years old caved in from the weight of snow on the roof. That building was used only in emergency, but its disappearance decreased the accommodation. Wj had had representations from agents of the shipping companies that the passengers complained of the character of the accommodation at this quarantine station, and having made a special trip to the island to investigate I felt that these complaints ware justified. The Grosse Isle buildings were erected 30 or 40 years ago at a time when the accommodation on passenger ships was of a very inferior character, and no doubt the quarantine accommodation was equal to the needs of the time. But, in the past 30 years the accommodation for ocean passengers on the ships has improved wond?rfully, and the accommodation on the island was certainly not commensurate with the accommodation now provided on the ships. I also found that the accommodation at Grosse Isle was -inadequate. On one or two occasions we had 2,000 people detained there,

but fortunately it was in summer, and in some cases we were able to accommodate them in tents. What we purpose doing is to use the old first-class building as a second-class building, and to erect a new first-class building as well as a third-class building of a standard suitable for third-class passengers. By the erection of these two 'buildings and some improvements in the existing buildings I think the accommodation will be sufficient for present needs. I had a report from Dr. Montizam-bert, Director General of Public Health and a special report from the officers at the station as to not only the desirability but the absolute necessity for this expenditure.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What was the size of the old building which fell in?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Speaking from memory, it was a low, wooden building, 100 by 24 feet, and the walls 8 or 10 feet high.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Could it not have been repaired?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: No, the foundations and the walls were rotten as well as the roof beams which gave way.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is th3 size of the new building?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: The first-class 'building is of two stories with an attic and basement, 22 feet by 152, with kitchen in the rear' and two small (buildings adjacent to be used for a laundry and a bakery.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: It will afford twice as much space as the old building?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Threa times I should say.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the total cost to be?


William Pugsley: 


Mr. WILSON (Lennox).: Of what material is it to be built?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: It is to be of brick with stone or concrete foundation walls, copper roof covering, and iron stairs with slate treads, good heating apparatus, and a bakery and laundry. The old buildings were all wood. The staterooms are to be supplied with all the conveniences to be found in corresponding rooms on the best lines. We have to supply what we ought to have had long ago, fire escapes on all buildings of two stories or more. This building is to have two stories. We have to make some changes to meet the demands of second-class passengers.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I suppose you have a fire protection service there?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes, we have a hose, a pump and a hydrant.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Has the contract been let for this building?


William Pugsley: Not yet. The plans are now in course of preparation, and we expect to call for tenders in the early spring.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I ought to say that the estimate of the architect's branch is that the cost of this building will be about $40,000.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: There is another building proposed to be built besides this one?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes, a third-class building. That will be of wood. Its estimated cost is about $3,000.
Levis-armoury and gun shed, $30,000.


William Pugsley: This is to make provision towards the erection of a drill hall in the city of Levis. The site has been provided by the municipality free of cost to the government. It is on St. Antoine street between St. Louis and St. George streets. The building is to be two stories high, built of brick with stone dressings on a stone foundation. It will be 112 feet by 103 feet, exclusive of a small projection on the southwest corner. There was a vote last session of $20,000, and we are asking for a revote of $19,000, so that very little has been spent.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the total cost to be?


William Pugsley: The chief architect estimates the total cost at $100,000, including the fittings.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: When is it proposed to build it?


William Pugsley: The plans are finished, and we expect to call for tenders very shortly.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Has there been a drill hall or armoury there before?


William Pugsley: I think not.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What quantity of troops are there requiring it?


William Pugsley: This is the information given to us by the Department of Militia and Defence. The 6th Regiment of Artillery is there; they say they have no guns because they have no accommodation. The full strength of the force is 265 officers and men. Then there is the 17th Regiment, with 196 officers and men.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: How did these two forces get along without a building up to the present?


William Pugsley: I understand from the hon. member from Levis that they have

been suffering a very great inconvenience. I think they have been storing their arms and equipment in a rented building.


George Halsey Perley: When was the money for this building first voted?


William Pugsley: I think in 1907-8.


George Halsey Perley: Will the hon. minister tell us why, if there was so much need of a building, nothing has been done about it.


William Pugsley: As early as 1906 the Militia Council made an application for a drill hall at Levis, and a vote was taken as early as 1907-8; but there was considerable delay caused by a difference of opinion as to what would be the best site for the building. A site was proposed at first, which was disapproved of because it was thought a better one could be got, and finally the town agreed to give the present site, which is a desirable one, and approved by the militia authorities.


George Halsey Perley: When was the present site decided upon?


William Pugsley: I think during the past year.


George Halsey Perley: The minister said the same thing a year ago. He said this:
The site is being provided by the municipality of Levis free of cost to the government.


William Pugsley: Of course, I cannot keep the details with respect to all these buildings in my head; but I remember that there was a good deal of negotiation between the town and the Militia Department carried on by the hon. member who represents Levis as to the giving of the site and as to whether the town should insist on certain conditions as to the character and cost of the building. There was a good deal of negotiation, and it is only recently that all these matters have been settled.


George Halsey Perley: If this building were needed four years ago, the government were very remiss in not putting it up, and if the people could get along four years without it, it is questionable whether it is really needed to-day. It seems to me that the Minister of Militia ought to be here when an item of this kind is up. We are in the dark, and I am sure the Minister of Public Works is not in a position to enlighten us from the point of view of the militia requirements.


William Pugsley: I can say what probably the Minister of Militia would say, and that is that as early as-1907 this was pressed on the Public Works Department by the Militia Council. I have had a great many conversations about it with my hon. friend from Levis (Mr. Carrier), and he has urged the necessity of this drill nail very strongly. Over and over again he has called my Mr. PUGSLEY.
attention to the inconvenience from which the regiment is suffering in not having a drill hall. My hon. friend knows that in 1907-8, when there was a period of depression and our revenues declined, we had to let many important public works stand over, and this was one of them.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: This is one of those peculiar cases in which the government seems to insist that a municipality should purchase the site for a building. What principle, if any, governs the minister in these matters?


William Pugsley: The department never stipulates that a municipality must furnish a free site.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: But they accept it.


William Pugsley: The town in this case offered the site and we accepted it. Of course that is some inducement to the department to move a little quicker and perhaps put up a better building, but we always decline to stipulate as to the class of building, and we never make it a condition that the town must furnish a free site. That would not be fair because the government can afford to pay for a site when it needs cne, but 1f the town offers a desirable site, I would not be doing my duty if I refused.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The system is a pernicious one. It is just as bad when a free site is offered as when you insist upon being given one. The fact of the government accepting free sites causes the people to believe that they are more likely to get a public building if they offer the site. In the city I have had the honour to represent, as part of my constituency, eleven years, after I was here a couple of years I found it was absolutely necessary for St. Catharines to have a drill hall, and I was told by the minister of that day, the late Mr. Tarte, that if I could get the municipality to furnish a first-class site, the department would put up the building, but that otherwise it would not. I am not saying that that is the rule followed, but the people are not to be blamed if they conclude that in order to get a drill hall they must furnish the land. I think the principle is a bad one. Either the building ought not to be erected at all or the government ought to be able to pay the whole cost. If the public service requires a building, the site should be paid for by the government and not be made a tax on the municipality. In St. Catharines, we had to pay $6,500 for the site selected by the Militia Department. I am not saying that the militiamen of that locality are not well served, on the contrary they have a first-class drill hall, and no one is complaining, but where a public building is required for the public service, the municipality should not be taxed to provide the site. It

might be a different thing If the municipality owned the land, and had no particular use for it, but the people of the municipality should not be specially taxed to pay for a site and hand that over as a gratuity to the King as represented by the Dominion parliament. There is another reason against this course and that is that it causes discrimination. Either every municipality which is given a public building should contribute the site or none should be called on to contribute.


William Pugsley: In this particular case,
I understand the town of Levis was the owner of this property.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What about the principle ?


William Pugsley: I would never make it a condition of the erection of a public building that the municipality should give the site; but I am not quite so far advanced that, if the municipality offered the site,
I would consider it my duty to refuse it. There is Regina, for instance with a splendid block of land admirably suited to be the site for a drill hall and armoury. The city owns that block of land. They have volunteered that, whenever we want to erect an armoury and drill hall in Regina, they will make a free gift of this well situated piece of property to the government for that purpose. They got it free some years ago, and they offer to give it to the government free as a site for a drill hall and armoury. In the case of Port Arthur, when I was there last summer, the mayor and a number of prominent citizens, told me that the town would give the government so many thousand dollars toward purchasing a site for an armoury. My hon. friend from Thunder Bay and Rainy River (Mr. Con-mee), was present and he will remember what my answer was. I said: If the town chooses to make a donation of an amount of money to pay for the site, well and good; we shall be glad to receive it; it will show that the town is interested in securing an armoury; but I can assure you, Mr. Mayor, that that will make no difference; we do not ask you for this contribution, and you can give it or not as you please, but it will not affect in the slightest degree the action of the department in relation to this drill hall and armoury.


Richard Blain: Is it to be constructed?


William Pugsley: We have an appropriation which we shall come to as one of the Ontario items.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Perhaps the minister has not understood me. I want to point out that, by the law of Ontario-I do not speak of other provinces, though I fancy a similar law exists in others-it is really illegal for a municipality to do what St. Catharines had to do to get that building.
And, had any ratepayer taken action to quash the by-iaw taxing him for this $6,500,
I believe he would have succeeded in the courts.


William Pugsley: I suppose the town felt seme little pride


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The people of St. Catharines wanted this building, and the man would be very unpopular who would ir.voke the law to prevent an expenditure ol $6,500 of civic money which would result in obtaining a public building costing $90,000 or more. Nevertheless, it is wrong, and the law of Ontario recognizes it as being against public policy, and makes it illegal to tax the people for any such purpose. That is the reason why I recommended the minister to consider whether he ought to accept these contributions. He cannot but see that it is apt to give rise to competition between municipalities for drill halls and other public buildings. One municipality might be the proper place for such a building, but the other municipality might say: We will get ahead of our rival by getting our lepreientative to offer the Dominion government a site. Such a thing ought to make no difference whatever, and I think the best way to settle it would be for the government to say: We wall insist on paying a reasonable price for the land upon which a public building is to be constructed.
At six o'clock, House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'c'ock.



PRIVATE BILLS.


[Stage Direction]
House in committee on Bill (No. 17) respecting the British Columbia Southern Railway Company.-Mr. Taylor (New Westminster).
On section 2,-time for construction of branch lines extended.
Mr. SPROULE.: There was a remedy suggested in the committee, which I think ought to be in future Bills of this kind. There are several branch lines to be commenced, then w'e say that if they are commenced within two years and completed within five years, the requirements of the Act will be complied with. Now, if I correctly understand it, provided they commence the construction of any one of these branch lines, it would mean the commencement of the whole of them. It seems to me when branches are set out that way, it ought to be provided that there must be a commencement of each one of them to comply with the Act. In

the case of another Bill, after it was passed, we did make that amendment, and it seems to me this one ought to be amended in the same way.


Mr. GRAHAM.: We discussed that question in the committee, and the chairman was inclined to the belief, along with the clerk, that the wording in the Bill itself would cover that point. It refers to branch lines in the plural; it says ' if the said branches are not so commenced.' If only one of them is commenced it would only apply to that one. The hon. gentleman brought that question up in the committee, and the chairman said that he thought this covered it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: No, the committee decided to change it and amend it in that direction.


George Perry Graham: That was not my understanding.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think it was at the suggestion of the minister or the clerk that it was read in that way. That provision is in another Bill, and I think the same principle is involved in both.


William Pugsley: ' Such branch lines as are authorized by the Governor in Council shall be commenced.' It means they must all be commenced within two years and completed within five years; and if such branches are not so commenced or not completed and put in operation within the said periods respectively, the powers of construction conferred upon the company shall cease with respect to so much of the branches as remain uncompleted. It seems to me that the plural being used, such branch lines shall be commenced,' it would not be a compliance with the terms of the section if only one was commenced.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That is where the difficulty comes in. I do not pretend to put my opinion against that of an eminent lawyer, and say that it would be in strict compliance with the Act to commence only one of them. What I say is that if this language is not plain enough to cover that clearly then we ought to remove anv possible doubt.	*


Mr HENDERSON.: This matter was brought up in the Railway Committee when my hon. friend (Mr. Sproule) advanced the same idea as he has just now. But the committee decided, I believe, that the Bill should pass in the form m which it was printed, and consequently no change was made. The committee was satisfied with the Bill as it was, and did not countenance any change, even although it was pointed out by my hon. friend that there might be a little inconsistency.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I was sitting in the committee, and distinctly understood that the language was to be changed.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.



CONSIDERED IN COMMITTEE-THIRD READINGS.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 33) respecting the South Ontario Pacific Railway Company.-Mr. Nesbitt.
Bill (No. 31) respecting the Guelph and Goderich Railway Conapany.-Mr. Rankin.
Bill (No. 18) respecting the Kootenay and A; row Head Railway Company.-Mr. Taylor (New Westminster).
Bill (No. 34) respecting the Walkerton and Lucknow Railway Company.-Mr. Donnelly.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 42) respecting the Collingwood Southern Railway Company.-Mr. Pardee.
Eill (No. 43) respecting a Patent of Conduits Company, Limited.-Mr. Clarke (Essex).
Bill (No. 44) respecting the Lachine, Jacques Cartier and Maisonneuve Railway Company.-Mr. Geoffrion.
Bill (No. 45) respecting the Montreal Park and Island Railway Company.-Mr. Ecre-ment.
Bill (No. 46) respecting the Ottawa Northern and Western Railway Company.- Mr McGiverin.
Bill (No. 51) respecting the Alberta Railway and Irrigation Company.-Mr. Magrath.
Bill (No. 52) to incorporate the Commercial Travellers' Accident Assurance Company of Canada.-Mr. Rankin.
Bill (No. 53) respecting the Dominion Atlantic Railway Company.-Mr. Pickup.
Bill (No. 54) respecting the E. B. Eddy Company.-Mr. Devlin.
Bill (No. 55) respecting the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada.-Mr. Clarke (Essex).
Bill (No. 56) to incorporate the Hudson Bay Mortgage Corporation.-Mr. Knowles.
Bill (No. 57) respecting the London and Nc rthwestern	Railway	Company.-Mr. Beattie.
Bill, (No. 59) respecting the Athabaska Northern Railway Company.-Mr. Turriff.
Bill (No. 60) respecting the Lake Champlain and St. Lawrence Ship Canal Company.-Mr. Geoffrion.
Bill (No. 61) respecting the Pontiac Central Railway Company.-Mr. Bickerdike.
Bill (No. 66) respecting the Brockville, Westport and Northwestern Railway Company.-Mr. Stratton.
Bill (No. 67) respecting the Burrard, Westminster Boundary Railway and Navigation Company.-Mr. Taylor (New Westminster).

Bill (No. 70) respecting the Canadian Western Railway Company.-Mr. Turriff.
Bill (No. 71) to incorporate the Empire Life Insurance Company of Canada.-Mr. Macdonell.
Bill (No. 73) respecting the Grand Trunk Pacific Branch Linss Company.-Mr. Turriff.
Bill (No. 74) respecting the International Railway Company and International Traction Railway.-Mr: German.
Bill (No. 77) respecting the National Weekly Indemnity Company, and to change its name to the National Guarantee and Accident Company.-Mr. Wilson (Laval).

[Stage Direction]
The order for private Bills having expired the House resumed in Committee of Supply.
Maisonneuve post office, $19,000.
['Oh, we could go on all night with that majority.\nSome resolutions reported.\nOn motion of Mr. Fisher, House adjourned at 10.30 p.m.', 'Monday, January 16, 1911.']
William Pugsley: We purchased a site first from Mr. Morgan of Montreal, and subsequently it was represented to us that we could get from him in exchange a considerably larger piece of land which would be adjacent to the proposed public park and we made the transfer.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: How long did the government own the land?


William Pugsley: Only a short time. We paid $8,437 for the site. We got in exchange for it a property 100 x 125 feet on Ontario street. The estimated cost of the building will be $40,000.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What post office have you there now, and what rent do you pay for it?	-


William Pugsley: We have a rented building for which we pay $60 per annum, but the new building will b^ a postal station. The present accommodation is utterly inadequate. It is a portion of the city of Montreal which is growing very rapidly.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Is it a portion of the city of Montreal at all?


William Pugsley: Yes, for all practical purposes, it is immediately contiguous to the city.


Mr. WILCOX.: What is the population?


William Pugsley: A few years ago it was
4,000,	but I presume it is 20,000 now.


Mr. WILSON (Laval).: Last year there were many outside municipalities annexed to the city of Montreal, and although Maisonneuve is not annexed yet the territory further east at Longue Pointe, and to the north, is now part of the municipality of Montreal, so that Maisonneuve is practically surrounded by the city. My hon. friend from St. Anne knows that.


Mr. DOHERTY.: Maisonneuve does not form any part of the city of Montreal, but it is surrounded north and east and west by the city.


Charles Avila Wilson: And south.


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is bounded by the river on the south.


Charles Avila Wilson: Maisonneuve is now about in the centre of the city of Montreal.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There is a central post office in Montreal, and if Maisonneuve is in the centre of the city as the hon. gentleman from Laval states, Maisonneuve must be within a reasonable distance of the central post office. We can hardly be expected to build a new post office at an expense of $50,000 in every municipality which is brought into the city.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the revenue from the present Maisonneuve post office for which we are paying a rent of $60 a year?


William Pugsley: Revenue last year $5,515, money orders issued $22,492, money orders paid $12,308. In pursuance of the plan adopted by the Post Office Department this will become a postal station. If I am not mistaken there are three postal stations in the city of Toronto.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: They did not cost $50,000 each?


William Pugsley: I think one of them cost more than that. Maisonneuve is practically in the centre of the city of Montreal, because considerable territory to the east has recently been taken in. but Maisonneuve is a long way from the Montreal central post office. It is essential for the accommodation of this very rapidly growing municipality that it should have suitable postal accommodation.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Maisonneuve is in the eastern portion of the city and you have a vote also in the estimates for an eastern postal station, so that I presume the two would be in close proximity. How many post offices will Montreal have in the near future if you keep multiplying them in that way?


William Pugsley: These different postal stations are regarded by the Post Office Department as necessary for the public accommodation. There is one station called the St. Catherine West station, one called the eastern postal station, one called the Point St. Charles postal station, .and there will also be the Westmount postal station. The hon. gentleman must Temember that Montreal has doubled its population in the last ten years and there are half a million people in the city now. It is spread over a

great extent of territory, and any gentleman who is familiar with Montreal will agree that these postal stations are absolutely essential.


Oliver James Wilcox: Is there free mail delivery from these stations?


William Pugsley: I do not know as to Maisonneuve, but there is in Montreal.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How far is the Maisonneuve postal station from the eastern postal station?


Charles Avila Wilson: About three miles from the central station.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But how far is the eastern station from the Maisonneuve station?


Charles Avila Wilson: It is about three miles also. Along the river it is three miles from Maisonneuve to the central post office, but the eastern station Is situated north on St. Catherine street so that geographically it would also be about three miles from Maisonneuve.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How many postal stations will you have in Montreal altogether?


Charles Avila Wilson: I do not know that any one could tell that unless the Postmaster General were asked to give the official figures, because there are a great many post offices in the annexed territory. There is one at Bordeaux, one at Ahuntsic, probably four in Longue Pointe, one at Parc Terminal, one at the Lakefield Cement factory and one at Tetreauville. When I was a candidate in 1902 there were only a couple of electors in Tetreauville, but in 1908 it had a population of 1,600. At Parc Terminal there were only 12 voters in 1908, but there are more than 150 there now. The deputy Postmaster General is studying the newly annexed territory in order to see what improvements can be made.
M<r. SPROULE, The hon. gentleman from Laval misunderstands me. I have no desire to refuse all necessary postal accommodation to the people of the city of Montreal, and the newly annexed districts, but I am trying to ascertain if I can get some approximate estimate of what the post office service in Montreal will cost and whether the government are following a business policy or not in this respect. The hon. gentleman mixes up post offices and postal stations, but there is a great difference between them. There are a lot of post offices kept by business establishments, such as drug stores, which do not cost much comparatively speaking. But take the eastern postal station for which we voted $40,000 last year, I presume that will not finish it. Then there is the Maisonneuve post office and I do not know how many more. Sure-Mr. PUGSLEY.
ly some one ought to be able to tell the House how many there are in the city of Montreal of these postal stations and post offices for which the country is paying so much.


William Pugsley: There is one on St. 'Catherine street west which cost about '$75,000. Then there is one on St. Catherine street east, the eastern postal station, which will cost in the vicinity of $75,000. Then there is one we are providing for Maisonneuve, which will cost in the vicinity of $35,000, besides $8,437 for the site. Then parliament has granted a vote for a public building at Westmount, which is a separate municipality, and the plans for which are being prepared. It is estimated that the Westmount building will co3t $75,000 in addition to the site. Then there is a postal station at Point St. Charles, which cost in the vicinity of $50,000.


John Waterhouse Daniel: What does the general post office cost ?


William Pugsley: The total cost is in the vicinity of a million dollars, perhaps more. Lately a very large addition was made by building on the site of the ' Gazette ' establishment running through to Craig street. We are besides, remodelling the old building so as to make it as nearly fire proof as possible.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is there in Ste. Cunegonde ?


Charles Avila Wilson: That was built before the annexation of Ste. Cunegonde to the city. Ste. Cunegonde was a separate municipality.


William Pugsley: That building is not owned by the government. The post office department rents quarters in it.


William Sora Middlebro: When did the department first decide to purchase this site for a post office ?


William Pugsley: Authority was given the minister on the 22nd December last.


William Sora Middlebro: When were the other sites purchased ?


William Pugsley: After the first site was purchased, we decided, on the 22nd of December last, to make an exchange.


William Sora Middlebro: Did the suggestion come from the department or the vendor ?


William Pugsley: It came first from the hon. member for Maisonneuve. Then Mr. Morgan offered to make the exchange. We had die offer looked into by an expert of the department who reported that the land we would get in exchange would be of considerably greater value than the one given up and the site was much more desirable.


William Sora Middlebro: So that here we have a private individual giving in exchange to the government a much more valuable property than the one he obtained in return.


William Pugsley: Mr. James Morgan has a considerable quantity of land in that vicinity and is laying out a square with the idea of beautifying it and rendering more valuable the surrounding property, which he owns there; and he said that in order to have the post office situated on a spacious piece of ground, so that it would be more striking from a public standpoint, he was willing to make the exchange although giving up a larger and more valuable area.


William Sora Middlebro: When the selection was made in the first place, was it made because the site first chosen was the best lor a post office ?


William Pugsley: Yes, it is right along side the other.


William Sora Middlebro: But in view of the fact that another gentleman would benefit by the change, the department agreed to accommodate him.


William Pugsley: In our opinion, the site offered in exchange was a better one.


William Sora Middlebro: And the hon. minister knows that the gentleman in question, Mr. Morgan, is a Liberal ?


William Pugsley: I do not know it.


William Sora Middlebro: I am asking the minister for the information.


William Pugsley: My information is that he is a very staunch Conservative.


William Sora Middlebro: Does the hon. minister know that of his own personal knowledge ?


William Pugsley: I have been informed on most reliable authority that he is.


William Sora Middlebro: Might I ask if the
information came from the hon. member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Verville) ?


William Pugsley: No.


William Sora Middlebro: Did he Tecommend it ?


William Pugsley: Yes, and it was also recommended by an expert of the department, who has had very large experience in examining and valuing properties and on whose judgment we rely. He recommended this exchange on the grounds that it was very desirable from a public standpoint.


William Sora Middlebro: Was he the same
gentleman who recommended the purchase of the first site ?


William Pugsley: Yes.


William Sora Middlebro: Then his	judgement in the first instance was wrong ?


William Pugsley: Not at all.


William Sora Middlebro: But in the second instance, his opinion would benefit somebody else.


William Pugsley: We are getting a decidedly better site for the same money.


William Sora Middlebro: We have the right to assume that in the first instance the minister did not do so well as he might have done anu that in the second the /change was made to benefit a private individual.


William Pugsley: All I can do is to deny that absolutely and to state that the facts are entirely different.


William Sora Middlebro: The hon. gentleman said it was changed because the individual said he had a plot of land there, and to place a post office there would benefit him.


William Pugsley: No ; my hon. friend asked me if I could conceive what would be his motive in giving to the Crown a more valuable piece of land, and 1 mentioned that, as he had more land there, and proposed to lay out a public square, he might be influenced by that. But, so far as I had knowledge, and, I believe, so far as the officials of the department had knowledge, to get the larger area after we had purchased the smaller one, we would have to pay a larger sum of money. We bought land which we thought would be suitable, paying the lowest possible price. Afterwards, we had tire opportunity of making the exchange for a larger area equally well situated-in some respects better situated, because it either actually forms a part of or is immediately adjacent to a public square.


William Sora Middlebro: But the change would never have been made if the property had not been in possession of a Liberal.


William Pugsley: The deputy minister informs me that, in the exchange, we get a whole block of land in place of the smaller area.


John Waterhouse Daniel: What size?


William Pugsley: I gave the figures-100 feet by 125 feet.


William Sora Middlebro: What is to be the total cost of the building including fixtures?


William Pugsley: The instructions to the chief architect were not to exceed $35,000. That would be without the postal fittings but would include heating and wiring for electric light.


William Sora Middlebro: Have plans been prepared?


William Pugsley: No.


William Sora Middlebro: Upon what are the estimates based?


William Pugsley: In view of the size of Maisonneuve -and the cost of other postal stations, I felt 1 was justified in saying to the chief architect that ih 3 must not exceed $35,000, and he will prepare his plans accordingly.


William Sora Middlebro: The minister knows that such instructions have been given and yet the buildings have cost from twenty-five to fifty per cent more. Has he any guarantee that this will not occur in this case?


William Pugsley: The hon. gentleman has the guarantee. He may decline to take it.


William Sora Middlebro: It is only worth what the experience of the past proves such things to be worth.


William Pugsley: Exactly, but you can't get any more than that.


William Sora Middlebro: I observe that the minister said, a year ago last November, that he would give the same instructions. Has anything been done to carry out the instructions and prepare the plans?


William Pugsley: Yes, and we are getting very good buildings at a lower cost than was formerly paid for buildings in places of equal population.


William Sora Middlebro: With the assistance of the hon. member for Laval (Mr. C. A. Wilson), can the minister tell whether there is a street postal delivery in Maisonneuve?


Charles Avila Wilson: I would not state it as a fact, but I believe there is. If there is not free delivery at this moment, there will be in the near future, because the districts adjoining Maisonneuve and recently annexed to Montreal are claiming free delivery, and it is to be organized. That is the reason I support the item ; you cannot erect a decent building suitable for the needs of that portion of Montreal-for this really forms part of the city, and I presume this building will be a very important centre of distribution-at a lower expense.


William Sora Middlebro: Where there is a street delivery, you do not need as expensive a post office building as though there were no delivery. And, considering that the post office has been carried on in this place in a building rented at $5 a month, does the minister think he is justified in expending $50,000- for, with the cost of fittings and so on, it Is pretty sure to cost that amount-which would mean a cost of Mr. PUGSLEY.
$5,000 a year as compared with the $60 a year formerly paid.


William Pugsley: If I thought Maisonneuve was going to be a place of not more than four or five thousand people within the next ten or twenty years, I ijhould say we ought not to have a building costing more than $15,000 or $20,000. But Maisonneuve is bound to grow. I am satisfied from what I have heard about it that it is not too much to look forward to an increase in population within fifteen years to fifty thousand at least to be served by this postal station. It is like the West. Take the city of Lethbridge, in the constituency of my hon. friend from Medicine Hat (Mr. Magrath). It has a population of 13,000 or 14,000 to-day. But there is reason to believe that in ten years it will have a population of 35,000, and in twenty years perhaps 50,000. In erecting public buildings, I must look to the future. In Lethbridge, we have agreed to pay $30,000 for a site for a public building. And when I ask for an appropriation for the erection of a. build-I think I shall be obliged to state that the building will cost $50,000 or $60,000, perhaps even more. We are building, not for to-morrow, or for next year, or even for the next five years, but for the next quarter-century or half-century, and wh^re a citv is growing rapidly, we must endeavour to meet the requirements of that city as it is to be. In Maisonneuve, the people are suffering for want of postal accommodation, and I feel it would not be reasonable or proper to go on with the limited *and miserable accommodation of the present.
Mr. P^BLEY. I am sure the minister (Mr. Pugsley) wants to be fair about this matter. Will he tell us how much money is spent on one of these postal stations in Montreal as a rule? What is the average cost of a postal station?


William Pugsley: I gave the items to the committee a little while ago. The cost of th" eastern postal station will be about $<'5,000, the cost of the Westmount station will be about the same. The cost of the one at Maisonneuve we expect will not exceed $35,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The minister gave us the same estimate as he did last year with regard to the cost. In making that calculation, I would like to ask him if he has taken into account the fact that the member for that riding has an eight-hour day Bill before this House, and expects it to pass. When it has passed and is applied to the erection of public buildings, has the minister, in making up his estimates, taken the fact into account that the passage of that Bill will mean a reduction of one-fifth in the number of hours the men will labour?


William Pugsley: I have not given special attention to that point. But if it should result in shortening the hours of labour a little bit, even though the work might cost a little more, I should be very glad. But I do not anticipate that it will cost much more in consequence of an eight-hour day Act. Perhaps by reason of the short hours the men will work more rapidly and put in better work.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not think that the hard-headed business men of this country will have much respect for a minister who would leave such a fact out of account in making up his estimates. What this House wants is an estimate that will be approximately correct, and if you take a building which will require five hundred hours of labour to erect, and that labour is charged at the common price for every ten hours, say $2 a day, and if you reduce the time by one-fifth, then, .to say that it is not going to cost much more, as the hon. gentleman does, will not increase the respect of the public for his intelligence.


William Pugsley: How does the hon. gentleman make it one-fifth?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Two hours cut off ten hours is one-fifth.


William Pugsley: In Montreal labourers do not work ten hours now.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That is approximately a day's work over the country.


William Pugsley: Not in the city of Montreal.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I don't know w7hat it is in Montreal, but that is what it is in the city of Toronto.


William Pugsley: I do not think in the building trade anywhere it is more than nine hours a day on the average.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In my part of the country, both in town and city, the average day ox labour is ten hours, and I am speaking on that basis when I refer to these buildings in Montreal. I do not know whether it applies to the city of Montreal, but it d( es apply to the country as a whole.


William Pugsley: When my hon. friend says that we shall lose two hours a day iron', the labour of every man who works on this building at Maisonneuve, because if this Bill passes they will only be obliged to work eight hours a day, my hon. friend will see, when I tell him that at the present time in the building trade a working day is nine hours in the city of Montreal, he is just one hundred per cent out of the way. New, I do not think that the passage of this Bill will make much difference, at all events I have not calculated the difference. These figures are based upon a nine-hour day. When this Bill passes I suppose the chief architect will revise his estimates.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I may tell the minister that I do know something about the construction of buildings, because I have been an employer of labour for the last forty years, and have been in the building trade for a length of time. Montreal is a great city and should have all the accommodation a city of its size would naturally require. I am not personally objecting to any expenditure that is needed in Montreal, . but the question is whether it is necessary for the convenience or service of the people to have, first, a central post office building at an expense of over a million dollars, and then no less than five other post offices at an expense of $318,000. It seems to me that while you might properly have postal stations for your work conjointly with the post office in the distribution and gathering of postal matter, the postal stations would not require to be so expensive and they could be supplied very cheaply. I know that some of our stations in Toronto are supplied very cheaply. I do not know the exact amount, but I believe that there they are comparatively cheap when put alongside these Montreal stations. Does Montreal require an expensive central post office, and then in addition five or six other post offices? If you have these are you not then making it confusing to those who are making use of these post offices in regard to addressing letters? Suppose you are addressing letters to Maisonneuve, it would be to Maisonneuve, but it is in the city of Montreal, and in addition you have the eastern postal station, and how would you distinguish that from the western postal station?


William Pugsley: Montreal east.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Montreal east. What is the other one?-Westmount. That would be addressed, I suppose, 'Westmount'?


William Pugsley: ' Westmount,' yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It seems to me that all this would be confusing. If you address a letter to the city of Toronto you address it, of course to a certain street and number, but to the general post office always. How do you manage it in Montreal, and will these different post offices make any difference in addressing letters to or from them so as to be sure of them reaching their destinations?


William Pugsley: My hon. friend knows how it is managed in the city of London where they have London North, London West, London East, and London South.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am not at all sure that as regards the delivery of letters the same principle applies in Montreal as in London. If it did I could understand that probably it would work all right. But it

seems to me that there is no need of these expensive post offices in addition to the central office. Might you not have small distributing offices at little cost to the country for collecting and distributing the mail in connection with the central post office? You have the free mail delivery as well. Why it should require so much to provide accommodation for the mail service of Montreal, which has a population of about half a million people when, in the city of Toronto, which has a very, much smaller population, but returns nearly double the amount of revenue to the country, it does not cost perhaps half the amount, is something that I cannot understand. Does it not suggest there is something wrong in the plan upon which the work is laid out, or the business principle that is carried into effect in connection with these various post offices?


William Pugsley: I do not know as to Toronto, but I rather assume that there is a post office at North Toronto; is there not?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: No; there is a postal station.


William Pugsley: Does the hon. gentleman know the corner of Charles and Yonge streets in Toronto? There is a postal station which cost $95,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I know something about it, but I am not very familiar with it.


William Pugsley: There are these two.


Mr. SMYTH (Algoma).: What is the revenue from them?


William Pugsley: It is not a question of revenue; it is a question of the necessity of having these postal stations for the accommodation of the people. There is another at Parkdale.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Yes, but the mail goes through the central office.


William Pugsley: Have you not a building there?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Not that I know of; I would not say that there is not.


William Pugsley: Yes, I am told that there is a postal station at Parkdale, but the point I want to make is that postal stations exist in Toronto on identically the same plan as in Montreal.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What did the one at
Parkdale cost?


William Pugsley: 

An hon. MEMBEE. Let it go.


William Pugsley: All right, we will let it go.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But that is not an answer. If the city of Toronto, with about Mr. SPROULE.
400,000 people, returns double the postal revenue, and if that number of people seem to be well served and the cost of providing the accommodation is less than half of what it is in Montreal, do not you think there is something wrong in the principle we follow in serving the people of Montreal as compared with that adopted in Toronto? It seems to me that there must be of necessity, and if it costs so much more to handle millions less of letters and papers in one city than it does in the other and returns to the revenue only half as much, I think it might to be remodelled in some way, because there is a want of good business principle involved in it. .


William Pugsley: I do not know as to the revenue, but it may veTy well be that those large departmental stores that you have in Toronto, such as the Eatons, whose business amounts to millions-perhaps to a million dollars a month-and whose business is largely done through the mails, the Simpsons and the other big departmental stores, would add immensely to the volume of the postal business and that could easily be transacted with one office, because the mail matter could all be put in bags and removed from these stores. As my hon. friend referred to Toronto, I mention these postal stations to show that the same plan is adopted in Toronto as in Montreal, and that postal stations are necessary for the public accommodation. My bon. friend representing the city -of St. John (Mr. Daniel) knows that we have postal stations in that city, that we have St. John North, St. John West and St. John East, St. John East being where the main post office is and St. John West being the place at which a public building was erected a good many years ago for postal purposes. London is divided into districts, there is no inconvenience, and I presume that in Montreal it would be the same. It may be Montreal East, Montreal West, or Montreal South, according as these postal stations may be denominated.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then I would like if the minister, at some future stage in his estimates, when we are dealing with public buildings, would give us information as to how many stations there are in Toronto, the cost of them to the country and how many there are in Montreal.


William Pugsley: Would my hon. friend be good enough to let that stand until the postal estimates are under consideration, because it would properly be furnished by the Post Office Department. If he would mention it then I will see that he gets the information.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then I may be told by the Postmaster General that it is not in his department, but in that of the Department

of Public Works, and I am asking the Minister of Public Works to provide that informa'tion at some future time, when we are dealing with his estimates again.
Mr. PUGSLEY'. I will see that it is furnished.	,
Marieville public building, $17,000.


William Pugsley: Of this amount $10,000 is a revote.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is this building to cost?


William Pugsley: The contract price is $16,300. In addition to that we paid $1,500 for the site; survey .of site, legal and travelling expenses, $340.91; fittings, furniture, lock boxes estimated at $3,500; sidewalks, fences, contingencies and superintendence, which will be in addition to the contract pi ice of $16,300.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the population?


William Pugsley: For the two places to be served it would be about 2,400.


Mr. PRICE.: What is the population of Marieville?


William Pugsley: It was 1,300 nine years ago, but I believe it is increasing; it has a convent, asylum, classical college, 11 stores, 4 hotels, saw-mill, foundry, straw and fur hat factory, threshing machine factory and a bank. It is evidently a place of considerable importance, and I believe it is growing quite rapidly.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What was the revenue last year?
Mr. PUGSLEY'. $1,323, customs duties $7,666, money orders issued $21,852, money orders paid $13,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What will be the total cost of the building?


William Pugsley: Th^ total estimated cost including site, fittings, furniture, contingencies and everything is $23,672.91.


Mr. BEAUPARLANT.: The parish of Ste. Marie de Monnoir is served by the post office of the city of Marieville and according to the census taken nine years ago the population of the parish is 1,036. That population has been increasing since. I live pretty near Marieville and I know that its population has largely increased in the last nine years. The statement read by the minister did not mention the two railways which run through the city of Marieville. Marieville is the chief town of the riding, it contains the registry office, a classical college, and among many others a very important factory under the management and ownership of Mr. Guillet. I may add that according to the provincial statistics 54
the riding of Rouville as well as the riding of St. Hyacinthe which I have the honour to represent, are at the head of the list so far as public instruction is concerned.


George Halsey Perley: Is there any other post office in the parish of Ste. Marie de Monnoir?


Aimé Majorique Beauparlant: I do not know of any.


George Halsey Perley: Do you know there are not any others?


Aimé Majorique Beauparlant: I do not think there are, the parish is small in territory but thickly populated.


George Halsey Perley: It would be extraordinary if a parish of that population had only one post office. These parishes usually have two or three post offices, and if the hon. gentleman states it is a fact that to his knowledge there is only one post office for the town and the parish I must accept itA but it is a very extraordinary thing.


Charles Avila Wilson: It is not so very extraordinary, because in St. Vincent de Paul with a population of 1,012 in the village, and 1,500 in the parish, according to the census of 1901, there is only one post office, the same applies to the parishes on Isle Gesu as my hon. friend knows, and it is pretty nearly the same thing in every village and parish in Quebec.


George Halsey Perley: No.


Charles Avila Wilson: Well, perhaps they are not so progressive as we are in Lachute.


Mr. EDWARDS.: Is a parish in Quebec something similar to a township in Ontario?


Charles Avila Wilson: I am not familiar with the topography of a township in Ontario, but I do know what a parish in Quebec is.


William Cameron Edwards: How many miles square?


Charles Avila Wilson: St. Vincent de Paul is nine miles long by six miles wide, but it is not square. If my hon. friend is strong in geometry he can make the calculation, it is a triangular.


William Cameron Edwards: Will the minister tell me what is the size of the parish of Ste. Marie de Monnoir? .


William Pugsley: I cannot say, I can inform my hon. friend that there was a memorandum filed by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries which contained a statement from the mayor of Marieville that according to a municipal census taken some time ago the population of the town was 1,671, that it had since increased to 1,750, and that there were 250 students in the college making the population of the village 2,000.


William Cameron Edwards: Wliat is the population of the parish?


William Pugsley: 1,054, making the population of town and parish 3,054.


William Cameron Edwards: Are we "to understand that this post office is the sole post office for the parish and the village?


William Pugsley: That is the information I have.


William Cameron Edwards: Of course, you may get a population of 2,400 into a very small space or you may have it widely scattered so that some of the residents would have to go five or six miles for their mail. In that view it is important that we should know the size of the parish. I would also like to ask the minister, on whose recommendation this post office is being established. Are we to understand that the Postmaster General has asked for a post office there?


William Pugsley: The application was made by the board of trade of the town of Marieville.


William Cameron Edwards: Has it the approval of the Postmaster General?


William Pugsley: I do not know. I may say that the Postmaster General is not in the habit of either approving or disapproving of the erection of buildings for post office and customs services. This is a matter in regard to which the Public Works Department has to take the responsibility. In this particular case the application was made by the board of trade and was strongly supported by my colleague the Minister of Marine and Fisheries.


William Cameron Edwards: Am I to understand from the Minister of Public Works that in regard to the erection of post offices the Postmaster General is not consulted and is not in the habit of saying anything one way or the other? I can hardly believe my ears. If that is the case, it strikes me as one of the most extraordinary things I have ever heard since I have been in this House.


William Pugsley: I may say that I have felt myself that it would be very desirable if the Post Office Department would pass upon the applications. Petitions have been sent to the Post Office Department, and the view that department has taken has been that as it has never been the practice, I suiipose running back to confederation, for the Post Office Department to pass upon the question of erecting a public building at a particular place, they did not express an opinion. Lately we have been urging strongly that the Post Office Department should pass upon the applications and my deputy tells me that just recently in regard to one application that department has ex-


William Pugsley: piessed an opinion, and we are in hopes that the request which my department has made will be favourably received by the Post Office Department. Of course, we always get them to approve of the plans when we propose to proceed with the erection of a building.


Richard Blain: In what constituency is this?


William Pugsley: Rouville.


Richard Blain: Who represents it?


William Pugsley: The Minister of Marine and Fisheries.


George Halsey Perley: The statement now made by the hon. minister gives us the reason why so many of these buildings are being built contrary to the public interest. If the Post Office Department found they had need of a building in a particular place, and made a request to the Minister of Public Works to furnish it, they would have some regard to the size of the place and the revenue it yielded, and try to get a building suitable to the requirements of the service. This Marieville post office is another sample of a public building being erected where it is not required, and on a too extravagant scale. There are many places throughout Canada far larger than this and with a far larger revenue which have no public buildings,' and when my hon. friend from Laval tells me there are paiishes in Quebec which have only one post office, and my hon. friend from St. Hyacinthe tells me this is one of the parishes, I will not dispute the fact, but that- very fact is a reason why this post office should not be built. In my county there is no parish w'ith only one post office, and this parish of Ste. Marie de Monnoir, if it is an ordinary sized parish, ought to have more than one post office. Now, you are proposing to spend $25,000 for a public building in this small village, which will cost the country for ever 4 per cent on the money, or $1,000 a year. The government would do much, better if they would spend that $1,000 a year in providing a couple mere post offices in this parish and establishing a postal route so that the people vr< uld have their mail delivered where they live. Of what use is it to spend this money and compel the people to go 5 or 6 miles for their mail? This government ought to be ashamed to spend money in this way.


William Cameron Edwards: I do not want to be understood as giving any factious opposition to this item, but when these post office items are brought up I think the Postmaster General should be here. I will teli you why I feel it my duty to my constituents to enter my protest against this item. There is one township in the county I have the honour to represent where there

is not a single post office, and the people have to go from 9 to 14 miles for their mail. Last year I made an application to, the Postmaster General to establish a post office in a certain part of my county where there were some 22 families, with their nearest post office from 5 to 8 miles distant. They sent a petition asking for a bi-weekly service. The cost of that would be $70 a year, with $35 a year for the postmaster's salary. The answer I received from the Postmaster General was that as it would cost that much to provide such a service, while the revenue would not probably be more than $10 or $15 a year, he did not feel warranted in making the expenditure. These people may walk from 5 to 8 miles for their mail because this government cannot afford to spend something like $90 a year in giving them a service twice a week. While I have no objection to large cities like Montreal having a more frequent service than country places, there is any amount of evidence in the estimates as they come down here from year to year that the country districts are grossly neglected as compared with the smaller cities and towns.
I repeat that that is not a fair condition of things. Let me give you another Instance to -show how unfairly this matter "works out. I asked for a post office on the border of the city of Kingston, just on the edge between the border of the city and the adjoining township. There is a school house within a few yards of the proposed site of the post office. There are stores right convenient, there is a regular mail route which goes down that street, the main street of the city, past this point where I asked for a new post office, so that it would cost nothing more to carry the mails there. The city is. served by letter carriers right up to the border of which I have spoken, but the good people there, when they want their mails, have to go to a sub-post office in the city about three quarters of a mile from this point. What would it cost to .give accommodation to the people in that district ? Simply $35 a year, the postmaster's salary It would not cost even that much because there would be some revenue from the office, so that the total cost would be only a matter of some $10 or $20 a year. Why (cannot the people then have this postal accommodation ? Why are they deprived bf their evident and just rights in this respect ? I cannot understand why. I find in these estimates item after item of $15,000 and $20,000 for post offices in insignificant places, and we are told that the Postmaster General knows nothing about them, that he is not even consulted. That is not only very strange, but absolutely unjustifiable.
54i


Oliver James Wilcox: While we are considering the appropriations for post offices which the government propose to build in a number of little places, there is a case I have in mind of quite a different .character which I desire to submit to the hon. minister. I would at the outset assure my hon. friend that I do not intend offering any criticism which will in any way affect that hilarity he thinks is so necessary in order that he may pass his estimates through this House. What I desire to impress on the hon. minister is the very urgent necessity for a public building in the town of Walkerville, one of the leading towns in the province of Ontario. The minister will remember that last winter I called upon him personally and had an interview with him regarding the construction of a public building at this point. For the very courteous manner in which he received me, I have nothing but the kindest words to say. I left his office with a very light heart indeed, feeling that I had accomplished something and that possibly I had learned something as well. I actually felt that by going down to the minister and submitting to him personally the plain unvarnished facts, he would possibly give to my request a favourable consideration, which he might not give if I were to rise in this House and criticise the government because it had not done its duty to the people at this particular point. You can imagine then my astonishment when I read the estimates this year. I had to rub my eyes to see whether I was asleep or not when I found that there Was not one cent in them for the construction of a building which my hon. friend had promised he would provide in order to meet the needs and requirements of the town of Walkerville. While the House has been considering the estimates these past few days, I took occasion to look up a number of the towns in which the government have deemed it wise to construct public buildings. I went through the lists in the provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Quebec, and I do not rise to offer one word of criticism upon any of the appropriations made for these places, but simply to point out that by no stretch of reason can it be considered fair to give small towns, with a population of not 1,000 people and with a revenue in one case of only $660, expensive public buildings and neglect, an important town like that of Walkerville with a postal revenue last year of over $12,000, although it has been repeatedly applying to this government for just treatment in this regard. Take, for instance, the town of Tis-nish, with a revenue of $988 and a customs duties of $2,141, we have an appropriation of $14,000 for a post office in that hamlet. Mind you, Mr. Chairman, I am not passing a word of criticism on that ex-

penditure. Take Fairville with a postal revenue of $1,191 and no customs collection, it is to be endowed with a $15,000 post office. Grand Falls had a revenue in 1909-10 of $3,118 and no customs collections, yet it is considered entitled to a $15,000 post office. Hampton, which had a postal revenue collected in 1909-10 of $660 and has no customs collections, is given $3,000 for a post office. Hartland, where the postal revenue is $1,955 and the customs collections nil, is given a $15,000 post office. Hillsborough, with $1,900 revenue and $11,612 customs collections, is also to he given a $15,000 post office. In all these towns the population runs from 700 and in not one of them does it reach 3,000. Now take the town of Walkerville and contrast it with these. I have here a list of the customs collections in that town beginning July 1, 1896
Customs Collections at Walkerville from July			
1, 1896, to September 30, 1910.			
from July 1,	1896, to June 30,	1897.	. $ 52,627 181897 "	1898.	. 56.424 821898 "	1899.	. 64,845 451899 "	1900.	. 79.538 951900 "	1901.	. 105,784 31"	1901 "	1902.	. 152,636 581902 "	1903.	. 158,931 83it	1903 "	1904.	. 177,608 01"	1904 "	1905.	. 436.513 56tt	1905 "	1906.	. 233,333 48t<	1906 to March 31,	1907.	. 228,610 15From April 1, 1907 "	1908.	. 325,977 191908 "	1909.	. 247,879 89tt	1909 "	1910.	. 407,534 614f	1910 to Sept. 30,	1910.	. 369,529 23Total.	$3,097,775 24I find the	following in	the	Windsor
' Record ' of January 11 :
WALKERVILLE'S GROWTH. January Customs Receipts are Barometer of Good Times.
For the month of December the customs receipts at Walkerville totalled $38,153.47, as compared with the sum of $26,960.40 received for the corresponding month of 1909. For the past nine months closing with December the total receipts were $500,124.06, as compared with the sum of $407,534.61 for the nine corresponding months of the 1909-10 period. The total receipts for the nine months ending with December received at Walkerville exceed the amount received at the Windsor customs for the same period by the sum of $82,833.39. The general prosperity and growth of the town, including the enlargement of different factories and'new ones built is given as the cause for such an increase in the amount of customs receipts for the past nine months.
Now just a word regarding post office revenue. In' the county of Essex w; have a number of important towns and I think the _ government is entitled to credit for having given such towns as Tilbury, Essex and Leamington suitable public buildings. But, in my judgment, it is not fair to place these towns ahead of the more important Mr. WILCOX.
town of Walkerville. At the beginning of the present session, I placed the following question on the Order Paper :
What was the revenue of the post offices at Tilbury Centre, Ontario; Essex Centre, Ontario; Leamington, Ontario; and Walkerville, Ontario; for the years 1904 and 1905, 1905-6, 1906-7, 1907-8, 1908-9, and 1909-10?
The answer to that question was given by Sir Wilfrid Laurier as follows :
Year.	Tilbury.	Essex.	Learning- ton.	Walker- ville.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	1904-5..	2,091 93	2,848 69	4,884 64	7,760	151905-6..	1,241 48	2,942 68	4,936 69	8,632	091906-7*.	2,205 24	2,397 55	3,900 41	7,293	671907-8..	3,054 12	3.340 10	4,991 17	10,470	491908-9..	2,965 35	3,488 41	5,086 73	10,579	011909-10.	3,025 50	3,381 54	5,719 91	12,104	31
* 9 months.
The revenue from Walkerville for 1909-10, exceeds that of Tilbury by $9,078.81, that of Essex by $8,722.77, and that of Learning-ton by $6,384.40.
It seems to me that these facts are sufficient to prove that this important town is worthy of consideration at the hands of this or any other government. Its board of trade has been agitating this matter for a number of years. It surely cannot be said with any degree of accuracy that the reason that Walkerville has been neglected is that a Liberal-Conservative - represents the riding. For twenty-one years that riding was true to the Liberal party of Canada, and if the political affiliations of the representative was the determining factor, even men the government has been derelict in its duty toward Walkerville. I have taken a great interest in trying to secure justice for that town as well as for every other part of the riding. And, while I am anxious that justice shall be done to that riding, I am anxious also that justice shall be done to every part of this country. The Minister of Public Works stated a little while ago that the first thing >he considers in deciding whether any particular place shall be given a post office building is whether good accommodation is already provided either by private means or otherwise. I submit to the minister that there is not sufficient accommodation provided to meet the needs and requirements of Walkerville to-day. I was informed by the manager of the Home Bank only last week that the people to-day have to wait three hours before the mail is distributed in the town of Walkerville. That in itself is sufficient, it seems to me, to prove that something should be done for that important town. A statement was

made on the floor of this House this afternoon to the effect that the governmmt did not give the riding represented by members of the opposition their fair appropriations. I have not been in this House a sufficient length of time to enable me to say whether that is so or not. But I submit for the consideration of the government this plain fact, that this great country in which we live belongs to the Canadian people. It does not belong to the particular party that happens to govern the country at any particular time. I believe this country stands to the Canadian people as an asset, the people thereof are the beneficiaries of that asset, and the government thereof are the trustees of that asset during the period it is the pleasure of the people to leave them in office. I say that these appropriations should be made to the different ridings upon a certain basis, having regard only for the development of the country and the just rsquirements of its various sections. I desire to say to my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works that I am not in the least criticising the government, I am only pleading with him to do justice to the town of Walkerville, and to give them that measure of relief to which they are justly entitled in respect to a public building.


William Pugsley: I think we must all admire the spirit in which my hon. friend has spoken. The hon. gentleman has only done what it was proper for him to do in the interest of his constituency, in calling my attention, as head of the department, to the needs of Walkerville in respect to a public building. But let me say to my hon. friend when he finds fault with me, that if I were to place in the estimates a sufficient amount to meet what I think are the reasonable requirements of the various sections of this country, even my hon. friend would be appalled at the magnitude of the figures. We have to cut our garment according to our cloth; we have to consider the various requests which are made, and to apportion to each the amount the Minister of Finance will allow us to expend according to our judgment from time to time. Now, I am not one of those who believe, like some hon. gentlemen opposite, that we can justify the expenditure of hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars in the great cities of Canada, while neglecting the erection of public buildings in the towns! and smaller cities. I am a great believer in giving encouragement to the people of the towns and smaller cities, so far as we can reasonably do so. But to-day, all parts of Canada are growing so rapidly, towns and cities are springing up so fast, particularly in the western provinces, and are growing so rapidly, that it is impossible for the Department of Public Works to keep pace with all the requirements. Now, I may
say with regard to Walkerville, that I was glad to have my hon. friend come and see me. We talked over the requirements of the town, and I was pleased to be able to tell him that I am in favour of constructing a public building in Walkerville. 1 told him that, I tell him that tonight. More than that, I can tell my hon. friend that for the purpose of erecting a public building in the town of Walkerville, we have bought one of the prettiest and most convenient sites which can be obtained in that rising town, and I intend at a not distant date to submit for the consideration of my colleagues the placing in the estimates of an amount to supplement what we have already done, by the construction of a handsome public building upon the site we have purchased.


Mr. CAMPBELL.: Where is the site, and when was it bought?


William Pugsley: My hon. friend will find it in the Auditor General's Report for the year 1908-9. We paid some $5,000 for the site.


William Ross Smyth: What month, please?


William Pugsley: The account does not give the month.


Oliver James Wilcox: I appreciate the kind words in which the minister has referred to the application I made to his department. I may say that it is immaterial to me whether the site was bought before the last election or since. What I am concerned about is to obtain justice for that very important town in my constituency. The impression I had from the minister when I interviewed him last winter, was that the demands upon his department had been much greater last year than he expected, but that he would place in the estimates a sufficient sum to erect a suitable public building in the town of Walkerville. But when I consulted the main estimates and found therein no vote for Walkerville, my hope was dashed to the ground.


George Halsey Perley: On this side of the House we do not raise objection to any reasonable expenditures for public buildings in any part of this country, but we object to the way the allocation of public money is made. There are many towns in this country that need a public building far more than the town of Marieville. I would move that this vote be reduced from $17,000 to $10,000.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend surely cannot be serious. The time to move for a reduction of this vote was when we asked for it in the first instance. But my hon. friend did not then seek to make a reduction. Having obtained the vote, we pro-

ceeded to enter into a contract in good faith under the authority of parliament, and surely my hon. friend will see that this is not the time to make a motion of this character. I presume my hon. friend does not make the motion without some serious expectation of carrying it, and if it were carried he sees the awkward position in which it would place the government. Suppose he were president of a company, or trustee for a company, and the shareholders of that company had invested him with authority to undertake a certain work and to sign contracts; and then, at the next meeting, a shareholder said: Oh, we think you made a mistake, and we are going to refuse to give you the money which will enable you to carry out in good faith the contract you have entered into, what would my hon. friend think of those whom he represented under those circumstances? We have entered into a contract in good faith, invited public tenders under the authority of parliament, and pursuant to the appropriation which parliament granted.
Why then does my hon. friend take up Marieville? Why does he let votes pass for other public buildings? Why does he allow the vote to pass for various buildings in Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick without challenging the merits of the case in so far as asking for a vote from the committee is concerned, while when it comes down to Marieville, he asks this committee to put the Department of Public Works in such a position that it cannot carry out the contract it has entered into by the authority of parliament? Is it because that constituency is represented by my colleague the Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Brodeur)? Surely my hon. friend, with his breadth of view, would not be influenced by considerations like that. I do not think that my hon. friend would. Therefore, it is that I am surprised that to-night my hon. friemd should single out this one town in the province of Quebec and seek to prevent us from carrying out in good faith contracts w'hich we have entered into in pursuance of the authority of parliament. It does seem to me that my hon. friend, upon consideration, will feel that he is not doing justice to the town of Marieville and I would be very sorry indeed to think, although it looks very much like it, that my hon. friend has picked out this particular towm because it is in the constituency represented by my colleague the Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Brodeur). The time is not tonight to refuse this vote unless my hon. friend can show that we do not need it in order to pay the contractor who is erecting this building. The time was when we asked for this vote in the first instance. That is the time when objection should have been taken, because, if then my hon. friend could Mr. PUGSLEY.
have succeeded in persuading the committee not to grant the vote, of course, we would not have entered into a contract, but having entered into the contract on the good faith of parliament, my hon. friend will see that, if his view should prevail before this committee, a gross injustice would be done.


George Halsey Perley: In the first place the question of the representative of this constituency has nothing to do with the matter at all. The minister must be troubled by his conscience or he would not raise that question at all at this juncture. Nobody else would suggest that we had singled out this item for that reason and there are lots of other items that we might call a vote on equally with this. Last night we objected very strongly to some items that were brought up in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick and for exactly the same reason. The minister said: You do not take any votes, why do you not challenge us to a vote? To-night we take the first item of this nature in order to challenge a vote and we say, to show that we are acting in good faith in this matter, that we will move to reduce this amount, so that the minister cannot find any fault with us for not challenging him to a vote. He says: How can you have a board of directors first giving authority to carry on certain work and the next time there is a meeting of shareholders they change their minds and say that they will not proceed with this work? That is not the position here to-day. We are not asking to alter the vote of last year, the vote under which the minister is acting, and the only vote under which he has authority to act. He came to this House last year and told us how much money he required, we voted it and he has only the right to spend that money in accordance with that vote. He comes and says that this is not the time to challenge this item. We say that this is a public building on which he is spending too much money, that it is far bigger than there is any need of, that there is no reason why it should not be made smaller. The minister says that we did not challenge a vote last year? There the minister makes a statement that he is not sure of. He will make any statement apparently which will answer his purpose for the time being. As a matter of fact we did challenge this item last year, and did take a vote on it. It was because, in looking up ' Hansard ' last year, that I noticed we had taken a vote on this item, that I thought it was probably only right that we should vote on the same item tonight so that the minister could not say that we had not challenged this vote at the right time. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that the minister has not very much ground for saying that it is not fair and right for us to take a vote on this matter to-night. If the amount is reduced it

-simply means that the minister will have to put up a sjnaller building without so many of the etceteras.


William Pugsley: I think I must be right in this: that at the last session of parliament, when this vote was first asked, I stated substantially what the building would cost, and my hon. friend knows perfectly well that the vote was not given for the entire completion of the building. What I say is that when a minister states what a building is going to cost and parliament makes an appropriation for a portion of the cost to enable the work of construction to go on during the current year, the faith of parliament is committed to providing the balance of the money that is necessary to complete the building. My hon. friend cannot be serious to-night in making this motion at a time when the work is under construction and when +v'is money is required to pay the contractor. My hon. friend says that if the amendment carried the only result would be that I would have to erect a smaller building. That would be true if nothing had been done, if no work had been performed, but the work has been entered upon, and what my hon. friend suggests cannot now be done. What I say is that, parliament having passed a vote for the purpose, it would be a breach of faith now with the contractors to make a reduction in this vote, because it is too late to alter the contract or the character of the building. Now my hon. friend did not give me the page of ' Hansard.' He sent the book over to me with a page open, but I do not see upon the page which he sent me that the Marieville public building is referred to.


William Sora Middlebro: Page 700, 'Amendment negatived.'
Mr. PUGSLEY;. Oh, yes. Well, I think my hon. friend is no doubt correct that a vote was taken.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


William Pugsley: But that was in 1909.


Mr. CURRIE (Simcoe).: Last year.


William Pugsley: No, not last year.


Morley Currie: A year ago November.


William Pugsley: Yes, that was in November. Then I apologize to my hon. friend.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


William Pugsley: I admit that he was right and that I was in error in saying that no vote had been taken.
Motion (Mr. Perley) negatived. Yeas, 34; nays, 43.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Was the vote of the hon. member for the Yukon counted?


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.: The assist ant clerk says no.
Megan tic public building, $22,000.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What will this cost?


William Pugsley: As it is Friday evening and quite a number of members are desirous to leave by train, I move the committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: That vote was too much for you.


William Pugsley: Oh, we could go on all night with that majority.
Some resolutions reported.
On motion of Mr. Fisher, House adjourned at 10.30 p.m.

Monday, January 16, 1911.