1912-02-09

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day being called.
Mr. PROULX.: 
Mr. SPEAKER.: I think the hon. gentleman (Mr. Proulx) is scarcely in order in entering upon a discussion at this stage of the sitting. If he desires to ask a question and simply wishes to make himself understood, he would be in order, tout not otherwise.


Edmond Proulx: I do not intend to discuss the matter. I only wish to draw the attention of the government to the situation which exists and I would like the government to bring the matter to the attention of the Railway Commission and have the railway companies try to .solve the difficulty. In some parts of my county I know that they have hay awaiting -shipment, and if it is not shipped before the spring freshets come on they will not be able to Ship it for many months. In other parts of eastern Ontario the situation is the same, and I hope the government will do their utmost to help the farmers and shippers to ship their hay. One of the reasons of the difficulty seems to toe that most of the hay is going to the United States; there is a lack of foreign cars and our railway companies are reluctant to send their cars across the border. I hope that the government will take the matter up with the railway companies.


Mr. COCHRANE.: This is the first I have heard of the matter excepting what I saw in this morning's paper. No complaint has been laid before me, but now that the matter has been called to my attention I certainly shall be glad to bring it to the notice of the commissioners', and I have no doubt that they will deal with it promptly.



INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY IN BRITISH COLUMBIA.

Mr. LEMIEUX.: May I ask the right hon. leader of the government if he has read the despatch published in, yesterday's paper about the international boundary line in British Columbia? I read in, the ' Witness ' of last night the following despatch :



INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY LINE-SENSATION IN BRITISH COLUMBIA AND WASHINGTON OVER NEW SURVEY.

[Stage Direction]
Vancouver, B.C., Feb. 8.-A story which reached New Westminster this morning from the Canadian side of the international boundary line has aroused tremendous interest here. It states that the boundary line between Canada and the United States, in the coal district, will be shifted two miles south and that two growing towns and coming cities
[Stage Direction]
which are now reckoned, without protest from this side of the line to form part of the United States are really part of Canada.
Then the despatch goes on to give further details. Has my right hon. friend learned anything about that?
Right Hon. R. L. BORDEN (Prime Minister).: My attention has not been called to the article, and I have heard nothing of the statement except what the hon. gentleman has just mentioned. I shall direct the attention of the proper department to the matter.



VACANT SENATORS'HIP.

Mr. MICHAUD.: I wish to -ask the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Borden) if he has received any correspondence from the French people of the maritime provinces in -connection with the -appointment of a senator to fil-1 the place left vacant by the late -Senator Comeau. There are -actually in the maritime provinces -about 165,000 French people; they have only one senator and I believe that -they ar-e entitled to three or four according to population.


Robert Laird Borden: The -appointments to new senatorshi-ps are now under consideration.



THE GRAIN ACT.

[Stage Direction]
House -again in committee on Bill (No. 32) respecting grain.-Mr. Foster (North Toronto).
On section 80-Grain shipped from public elevators, re-inspection.
Mr. FOSTER (North Toronto).: It will be remembered that I proposed to insert after the word ' quality ' in subsection 2, the words- ' or is manifestly not of the grade called for by the certificate.' This is to provide for what occasionally takes place where a lot of grain turns out to be manifestly of a different grade from that shown on the certificate. There is no recourse so far as the Act is concerned in such a case and this simply proposes that in such a case the grain shall not be regraded but that the inspector shall endorse across the face of the original certificate a statement of the facts as he does in respect of the other two conditions mentioned in the section, where the grain has deteriorated or has gone out of condition.


Mr. OLIVER.: My hon. friend will agree that there is always grave danger in attempting to provide for special cases by general legislation. The amendment is intended to provide for a case that should not arise. If the inspection and transportation of the grain has been carried on in accordance with the Act the condition


Rodolphe Lemieux: would not arise, and this is particularly an instance where general legislation should not- be invoked to cover a special case.


George Eulas Foster: We have already tried to cure two special cases by general legislation, the cases of grain going out of condition and deteriorating in quality. These are not normal conditions, they are abnormal, and so they are special cases. If general legislation is invoked to cure two cases like that which do not occur frequently what objection can there be to caring a third condition which occasionally occurs where, through neglect or mistake or any circumstance not referable to the owner of the grain, this condition arises so that the owner of the grain would not he prejudicially affected thereby. There is no regrading, the inspector simply makes a statement of fact upon the certificate as in the two preceding cases.


Frank Oliver: The two cases -already provided for in the section as it stands arise m the natural course of events and cannot possibly be prevented from arising, but the case now being provided for can only arise through mistake or lapse of some kind for which it is true the owner is not responsible, but for which the interests handling the grain are undoubtedly responsible, and I say that such a case is not a proper one to be met by general legislation. My hon. friend -says there is to be no regrading, but as a matter of fact the endorsation by the inspector upon the certificate that the grain is' of such and such a character is to all intents and purposes a regrading. It is true that the certificate is not withdrawn and another issued, but across the face of the certificate is written the responsible statement of tire inspector that the grain is of such and such a grade, and I take it that the statement by the inspector is as good as a grade in the world's market; it is for all practical purposes a regrading.
The owner of the grain is not likely to call attention to the fact that it is of less value than when it was graded. That is the situation which is provided for already in the Act. It is where the grain has deteriorated, and the owner of it, to save himself from the consequences of the supposition that it has deteriorated more greatly than it has, calls for an inspection. But in the proposed amendment, it is not a question of the grain having deteriorated, because if it has, the owner is the last man to call attention to it. It is the shipper or the man who is interested in the grain who will draw attention to it. Let me emphasize this point, that in the carriage of the grain from the head of the lakes to the

mill in eastern Canada or to Montreal there are several occasions when bulk is broken, and when there are opportunities to mix the grades, and the provision that my hon. friend proposes to introduce would give the man at the eastern transfer elevator an opportunity to mix the grades to his own satisfaction, and to get the benefit of that mixing. That is objectionable from every point of view. It is true, as my hon. friend says, that the grain is not re-graded. In one way it may be said not to be; but the grain has the inspector's certificate that instead of being No. 2 it is No. 1, and I take it that carries the full weight which the owner of the grain would get the benefit of. The proposed amendment is of a most serious character, and the reasons which have been offered for the change do not appear to me sufficient to warrant a provision which would open the door to mixing, in order to meet a case which in the nature of things cannot arise if every part of the business is transacted as it should be. It does not arise in the course of nature, but only in the course of administration. Deterioration is provided for already. I want the clause left as it is. I think it is the only safe thing. The clause is dangerous as it is, but it goes as far as it is safe to go, and any further change in that direction would be much more dangerous.


George Eulas Foster: My hon. friend's argument has not convinced me that we are opening the door to any troublesome results in the administration of the Act. The simple case is this. Here is a man in the east who has his car of wheat, and he has paid on the grade at Fort William, we will say No. 2. It comes to him and is about to be delivered. When he opens it and sees it, he says: That is not No. 2; that is No. 3 or No. 4; it is not the grade I bought. He calls in an inspector, and the inspector views the grain, and if he thinks it is manifestly not of the grade certified, he writes that fact. He does not say that it is No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, or No. 4. The Act expressely provides that it cannot be re-graded. He simply writes the fact on the certificate that in his view the grain is manifestly not of the grade it purports to be. What damage is done to anybody or anything by that? But you have made it possible for a man to be relieved and to right himself in the transaction between himself and the original shipper. My hon. friend seems to think that because that is not natural it should not be provided for. The truth is, we do not have to provide so many safeguards against things that are natural as against mistakes that arise out of human fallibility and human frailty. We provide for all the inspection and control that we think is necessary, but these
are all instruments that are fallible and may make mistakes, and it is against any case of that kind that we want to provide some sort of direct remedy. This places the man who receives the grain in a position to obtain his rights. Blow it lends itself to mixing is something I have not been convinced of by my hon. friend's argument.


Mr. TURRIFF.: Suppose a cargo is shipped from Fort William as No. 3. It arrives at the eastern elevator and is taken in as No. 3. If it should happen to be a very strong No. 3, would there not be a possibility of an inspector thinking that it should be No. 2?


George Eulas Foster: It is not the inspector, but the person interested in the grain, who calls attention to it.


John Gillanders Turriff: The person interested in it might think it was stronger than No. 3, and might easily get a certificate as No. 2. He could go to an inspector at an eastern elevator and point out to him that that was a better wheat than No. 3, that it had been manifestly -wrongly graded, and he would secure from the inspector a certificate that it was not No. 3, which would practically make it No. 2.


An hon. MEMBER.: He anight imake it No. 4.


John Gillanders Turriff: He might, but if it were very much out of line so that the owner wanted a change of grade, it would not be at a grade lower.


Mr. SCHAFFNER.: Wliat is the object of that amendment anyway?


George Eulas Foster: Representation was made to me by the Dominion Millers' Association in eastern Canada that
sometimes lots of grain, came down, which were manifestly kwer than the grade given before shipment. Two or three concrete instances were given of grain shipments in carload lots which wrere purchased as No. 2 but which were manifestly lower than No. 2. The purchaser buys a carload of No. 2 at a price but the grain is manifestly not that grade. It is a mixed grain and worthless to him for milling. The buyer calls the attention of the Inspector to it, and if the inspector agrees that the grain is obviously not of the grade at which it was sold, he writes that across the certificate. Then the man who bought No. 2 and finds a car at his door which is No. 4 or no grade, has the written statement of the inspector to that effect. I have had this clause looked over by my inspecting officers and they agree that it is a provision which may be helpful in certain special instances and they cannot see that it will lead to any dangerous results.


Mr. STAPLES.: Why is it necessary to write across the certificates? Could you not get a declaration from your inspector in writing and not tamper with the certificate?


George Eulas Foster: In the two preceding instances, where there has ' been a loss of condition or deterioration in quality, that is the course thought best to adopt, namely, to write on the back of the certificate the facts and have the inspector sign that writing. Then the matter is referable to the chief inspector at Winnipeg, and if necessary samples can be taken and the thing be readjusted.


William D. Staples: The object is simply to protect the buyer? I do not see why that could not be done by calling in an inspector and have him make a declaration of the facts instead of tampering with the certificate. In that way the same protection could be afforded.


George Eulas Foster: The certificate is the document which starts at the source and accompanies the lot until its disposal. It is not quite right to say that the certificate is tampered with because under the law a plain statement is written *across it, signed by the inspector. I cannot isee that any one can be injured by that.


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: As I understand it now, the amendment comes from the suggestion of the millers, and the only thing they contemplated was that the grain would be of a lower grade than mentioned in the certificate. That the grain might be raised from No. 3 to No. 2 did not enter the minds of the millers.


Frank Oliver: With all due respect to the milling fraternity^-and no one has more respect for them than I-I think it was the other suggestion that occurred to them. I want to bring to the attention of the committee the fact that a principle of the Grain Act has always been that the inspection made at Winnipeg shall be final with the exceptions mentioned, and the proposal of my hon. friend is an absolute departure from that principle. If a miller finds himself defrauded 'in the grain he receives, there is no necessity to provide a remedy for him in the Grain Act. The law courts are open to him as to any other man. I can see no reason, therefore, why we should in any way tamper with the important principle of the Grain Act to which I have referred. With regard to the suggestion of the hon. member for Macdonald that the inspector should be bound to make a declaration at the demand of the owner of the grain, he must remember that this does not say it is only the owner who will have the right to demand reinspection. Anybody interested can do so. While the
Mr. FOSTER (N. Toronto.)
miller might not want the grain to be graded higher, the man who sold it might. I want to be very strong on this point that the principle of a single inspection is the very foundation principle of the Grain Act, and the maintenance of standard grades. My hon. friend will notice in going through the Act that there are many places where a little latitude might be given but where it is not, just because it was necessary to stick to that principle. Here is however, a proposal to depart from it, which is most objectionable from every point of view. I notice that these sections are headed ' Eastern inspection division ' >as though they applied only to the grain grown in that division. But clearly, from what the minister has said, it is intended that these provisions shall apply to grain coming from the west, inspected at Winnipeg as western grain and arriving at the mill in the east. But on the way the bulk is broken as different places where there has been every opportunity to mix the grain. Under this amendment, there would be an open door for the mixer to get the benefit of his work.


George Eulas Foster: My hon. friend (Mr. Oliver) starts out with the statement that the bed rock principle of the Bill is that there shall be the inspection, and that the grades shall not be meddled with after that. And then he immediately makes exceptions.


Frank Oliver: Certainly.


George Eulas Foster: Why does he make these exceptions?
Mr. OLIVER Because they were neces-ary.


George Eulas Foster: Of course, because they were reasonable. But why? For the protection of the buyer. Having made two exceptions to the principle, surely it is not for him to raise an unreasoning outcry against exceptions, but to show where this exception will be disadvantageous. We have shown where it will be helpful in protecting the buyer. Why should a carload of grain, which has been inspected as No. 2 or No. 1, but which by some neglect, change, metamorphosis, turns out to be a car of feed go further under the false grading of No. 1 or No. 2? Are we so blindly attached to a principle that we will not permit the rectification of a wrong to an individual?-and in the case I have mentioned must the wrong be permitted against the whole grading system of a profligate car of feed sailing through a civilized country under the certificate of No.
1 or No. 2? The first opportunity to-right the wrong should be availed of, it seems to me. I give my hon. friend credit for his stern adherence to principle; but we do not live long in this world without

knowing that every principle has its exception.


Frank Oliver: Whilst we must admit that every rule has its exceptions, and every principle must have exceptions, I think my hon. friend (Mr. Foster, North Toronto) will agree that the fewer exceptions the better.


George Eulas Foster: Quite so.


Frank Oliver: I think that the two exceptions made are no precedent for the exception the hon. gentleman proposes to make, because they arise out of entirely different circumstances. These exceptions arise out of conditions which are unavoi^: able, while the exception he proposes to make arises out of avoidable conditions. IE this grain becomes metamorphosed, if it is changed, as it should not be changed, in its course from the inspection to the consumer, the system of inspection is at fault, or the system of transport is at fault; and if there is a fault, it should be brought to attention and cured as quickly as possible.


George Eulas Foster: Hear, hear.


Frank Oliver: If the miller who receives that grain has to seek redress at law, there is no doubt that attention will be drawn to the fact that the transportation system is not working in accordance with the terms of the Act and means will have to be found to remedy that wrong. But if, when the miller receives the changed grain, all that is necessary is for the inspector to write across the certificate and the miller will suffer no loss, there will be no reason for particular inquiry into the method of transportation and the abuse will go on. Provision is made in the Act to practically sanction, yes to actually sanction, deviation from the terms of the Act. I think that most remarkable legislation, and objectionable in proportion as it is remarkable.


George Eulas Foster: As war is the last recourse between nations, so law is the last recourse between individuals. If there is any way in getting a wrong righted between individuals without going to law, by all means have it taken advantage of; settle the matter before you get into the hands of the lawyers and before the judges. I see a lawyer on the other side of the House shaking his head. He sees possible advantages disappearing if a theory of that kind be generally acted upon. But I think that the commission generally, including the lawyers, will say that this is right. If you are against mixing, seize the mixed or metamorphosed grain as quickly as you can. Trace the wrong back to its source. If it is a bad officer, chuck him, if a bad method, have it changed. In this case, it -would be referred to the chief inspector with a sample of the grain. The chief inspector has means of tracing the matter_and quickly detecting where the mixing or wrongdoing took place. But my hon. friend would give his allegiance to principle, and that on a mere basis of numerals,-a principle with two exceptions is all right, but a principle with three exceptions cannot be allowed at all. That does not seem to me reasonable.


John Gillanders Turriff: There is a good deal of force in what the minister (Mr. Foster) has said. But when he comes to handle the men in charge of the terminal elevators and the receiving elevators for a few years, he will find that there is no class of men so well able to take, advantage of the leeway that he gives and so get around the main intent of the Act. And they wall mix that wheat to their advantage whenever they can get a regrading of it.


George Eulas Foster: They
cannot get a regrading; the law absolutely forbids it.


John Gillanders Turriff: It is practically a regrading.	.


George Eulas Foster: Under no circumstances shall such grain be mixed or regraded.


John Gillanders Turriff: It is practically a regrading.


George Eulas Foster: I take only the common sense view of it and leave my officers to give me the official view of it. I talked over the matter with Mr. Gibbs, our chief inspector, who is present, and I would not have proposed it if it could have been shown me by the opinion of my chief officer where it would work out wrongfully. In fact, if I had been shown to be mistaken in the assertion I make that this would be the means of tracing out and actually preventing mixing or other wrong things, I would not have brought it down.


Frank Oliver: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster, North Toronto) is very insistent on the point that this will not be a regrading. Now he has said that his purpose is to avoid litigation. Speaking of grain that is of a lower grade, it must be assumed from what he has isaid, that the inspector's notation on the certificate will be a sufficient protection to the receiver or purchaser of that grain.


George Eulas Foster: It will be an evidence.


Frank Oliver: Unless it is a sufficient protection it will not avoid litigation. If it is a sufficient protection in the case of degraded grain to avoid litigation, I presume it would be just as sufficient a pro-

tection in the case of grain that was found, at the instance of one of the parties concerned, to be of a higher grade; in other words, that it would for practical purposes be a regrading of that grain. Now, I want t-o deal with this question of the effect upon the operations of the department as two propositions, one the accepting of the notation of the inspector as a settlement of the question, and the other, the leaving the miller to the recourse of law. In the case of accepting the notation of the inspector as a settlement of the question, whose interest is it to go through the department and the operations of the trade, and find where the fault was? It is nobody's interest. The miller has got what he wants, the inspector has got the trouble off his hands, and the department never hears about it, and the officials of the department are encouraged then to think that the next time such a thing occurs they will get away just as well; whereas, if every man in the department knows that if that grain goes through and is not as it ought to be, the man who receives it is going to take recourse, and the department is going to be informed, and then somebody will lose his head. That is the view I take of the matter. For the sake of the administration of the Act itself it is necessary that that which is a fault on the part of those who are operating under the Act, should not in any way be condoned by the mere notation of the inspector.


John Gillanders Turriff: I wish to ask the minister if a record will be kept of all the wheat that may be changed in that way, and a return made to the department, so that we will know a year afterwards just how it has worked out?


George Eulas Foster: Undoubtedly. My hon. friend said that what he feared was that the department would not be notified, and would not be kept alive to it, To my mind, this is just what will keep the department alive to it. So long as the department is under my charge I intend to know everything that ' is going on, and if anything goes wrong, whose fault it is.


John Gillanders Turriff: And a report made?


George Eulas Foster: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 90,
George Eulas Foster: 
Frank Oliver: t The proposal is to drop out the words ' eas.t of Winnipeg.' That leaves no exception in the city of Winnipeg, or in St. Boniface, or anywhere else. All grain in public or terminal elevators is to be subject to inspection, both in and out.


Frank Oliver: Would the minister explain the purpose of the amendment?


George Eulas Foster: It is to make the principle of the Act dominant in all cases. At present it is possible to have elevators in Winnipeg or St. Boniface that are not subject to this. There are, I think, two elevators in St. Boniface at the present time, and I see no reason why an elevator in St Boniface, public or terminal, should have privileges otherwise than an elevator which is a mile away, and just outside the district of Winnipeg.


Frank Oliver: I presume there is a prohibition of the mixing of grades in all public and terminal elevators.


George Eulas Foster: Grain
goes into the elevator in St. Boniface of all grades and all kinds, and it stays there. Then it can be sent out irom that to Fort William or Port Arthur, and can be there inspected and given its grades.	What
takes place in the elevator no man knows.


Frank Oliver: I wish to know whether there is some specific provision in the Act as it stands that grain stored in a public or terminal elevator shall not be mixed?


George Eulas Foster: There is a general clause against mixing.


Frank Oliver: I would like to read that clause in connection with the proposed amendment. Unless there is a prohibition of mixing, it would be possible, under this amended provision, to put grain of a number of different grades into an elevator, and take out a number of entirely different grades.


George Eulas Foster: At present that is what is done.


Frank Oliver: That is what we wish to avoid and we would not wish to have that done under the amendment.


George Eulas Foster: The amendment is . to prevent that. In section 126, subsection 8, you have the clause that:
In no case, whether in a terminal elevator in the western inspection division or in a public elevator in the eastern inspection division shall grain of different grades be mixed together while in store.
That takes in all of the western division.


Frank Oliver: 
George Eulas Foster: And all the public elevators in the eastern division.


Frank Oliver: But the public elevators in the western division are not included in that.


John Gillanders Turriff: I would like to ask the
Minister of Trade and Commerce if he would prevent the mixing of two grades in the hold of a vessel. Would it prevent running No. 2 and No. 3 wheat simultaneously into a vessel and mixing them?


George Eulas Foster: When grain is inspected out at Port Arthur into a vessel all grains of the same grade are to be put into one hold unless the owner of the different grades of grains wants them to be put into a hold together. That is his own business, but in that ease, he only gets the grade of the mixed grain with the quantities or the weights of each.


Frank Oliver: The minister will, perhaps appreciate my curiosity in regard to this section when he reads the first subsection of section 91, where it states that all grain grown west of Winnipeg, shall be inspected at Winnipeg or at a point within the district, and that the inspection shall be final, that is to say that there shall be one inspection. Do the words ' shall be subject to inspection, both inwards and outwards in section 905 mean an inspection to verify the original inspection, or would it be considered possible, to constitute one of these as a reinspection? It would perhaps be just as well, if we are going to stand by the principle contained in subsection 91, to be a little more specific in section 90, in regard to that matter.


George Eulas Foster: Let us see how it reads:
90.	All grain placed in public or terminal elevators east of Winnipeg, in the division, shall be subject to inspection both inwards and outwards.
That is plain.


Frank Oliver: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: When it goes into the elevator it is inspected in; when it goes out it is inspected out. Then,
91.	All grain produced in the provinces of
Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta and in the Northwest Territories, passing through the Winnipeg district en route to points to the east thereof shall be inspected at Winnipeg or a point within the district

The car shall be inspected.
-and, on all grain so inspected, the inspection shall be final as between the western farmer or dealer and the Winnipeg dealer.
Section 90 refers to public and terminal elevators and to grain in passage from the Winnipeg district in cars.
In the case of grain which is shipped east from an elevator in Winnipeg or St. Boniface, the sample for inspection shall not be di'awn from any car until the car has been hilled for shipment by the railway company.
It goes into the elevator in different grades and it may be kept there for two, three, four, five or six months. They then draw a car up and fill it. They get the bill of lading for that car before it can be inspected; otherwise they might return it to the elevator, but, having the bill of lading, they call for inspection ;and that car goes forward under that inspection grade. Then, in subsection 4 of section 91, there is another one of these exceptions:
When, owing to extreme pressure of business, the. railway company, or other transportation company, finds that cars containing grain are being unduly delayed for inspection purposes in Winnipeg, then the company, upon notification to, and with the consent or, the chief inspector, or, in his absence, the inspector, may remove a special number or cars to Fort'William without inspection at Winnipeg.	,
Arrived at Fort William they have to be inspected there, and a grade given to them. Any grain inspected at Winnipeg, or other western point, may be reinspected at Fort William or other terminal elevator in the division without additional charge. That is to provide for an appeal in case of difference as to the grade. Whilst the car is en route to Fort William, or when it arrives at Fort William a sample may be drawn to be brought back to the inspector at Winnipeg to settle a dispute, and that is done without additional charge. But any grain not inspected west of Fort William shall be inspected at that point, and a certificate shall be issued on payment of the usual fee which catches the last possible residue of grain coming through in these different ways. It looks to be all sealed up.


Frank Oliver: Is the inspection of grain out of the elevator a commanding inspection, or a verifying inspection?


George Eulas Foster: By a verifying inspection my hon. friend means is it to make sure that the same grade goes out as comes in. That is what it is for.


Frank Oliver: The words in section 1 hardly express that idea.


George Eulas Foster: That is what we understaand them to mean.


William D. Staples: If ten cars were inspected in as No. 1 Hard, and were in-pected out on a different grade that would be evidence that there had been mixing going on. Then you would follow and prosecute under the Act.


Frank Oliver: I wanted to find out if the two inspections were to prevent mixing.


George Eulas Foster: The second inspection is for the purpose of verifying the first inspection and preventing mixing.
On section 91, inspection,


Frank Oliver: Would it not be better to say that the inspection is final, subject to certain provisions of the Act when the intention of the Act is that it shall be absolutely final. The words following the word ' final ' in the second last line in the first subsection seem to me .to limit the authority of the inspection for no reason.
.Section 105,-qualities of grain,


George Eulas Foster: I propose to add tire following as subdause (a) ;
All changes in the designations or weights [DOT]of grades made in this section shall only apply and have effect on and after September L 1912, and until the said dates the grades of grain shall hare effect as previously defined in the Inspection and -Sale Act and the Manitoba Grain Act as on January 1, 1912.
That is to prevent any interference with contracts made on the old grades.


Frank Oliver: Should .there not be some words .at the beginning .of this section stating that these grades >aipply only to the eastern inspection division, and not generally?	6


George Eulas Foster: The inspector states that whilst these have so far been applicable only to the east, if might occur that in the west some of these grades might be grown; and, if so, this clause should be .applicable in the west, while the clauses applying to .the western section would hold for the west as well.


Frank Oliver: I cannot understand how this section, worded as it is, will hold with the section, regarding western grain. If this section were amended to make it apply generally, with the exception of those provisions relating to western grain, there would be no conflict.


Mr. SUTHERLAND.: When this matter was under discussion in the House the other day, I referred to section 115 dealing with rejected grain. This- section defines rejected grain as follows:
Rejected grain shall comprise all spring wheat for warehousing, but too low in weight or otherwise unfit to he graded as No. 3. This includes seed dirty grain, also screenings from elevators.
I wish to draw the attention of the minister to the importance of regulating the disposal of this rejected grain. One lion, gentleman the .other day said he thought it was covered by the Act for the Inspec-Mr. STAPLES.
tion and Sale of Seeds. I find, on looking over the Act, that it does not cover it. The report of 'the Minister of Agriculture for 1910 deals particularly with rejected grain, in the following terms:
Noxious weed seeds in ground feeding stuffs and screenings from commercial grain, which are distributed for the purpose of stock feeding, have been the cause for some serious complaints during the past year. Investigation thus far would seem to indicate that the causes for these complaints are restricted, quite largely to the province of Ontario, where the screenings from the cereal grains grown in the prairie provinces after being ,recleaned at the large elevators on Lake Superior and elsewhere are marketed.
Again, in his report for 1911, the Minister of Agriculture alludes- to the same cause of complaint, and there states :
I, therefore, instructed my seed commissioner to continue the investigation into the condition of ground feeding stuffs distributed for sale to farmers, and, by collecting and examining samples and by inquiry, to ascertain what practical means, if any, may he adopted to prevent the distribution of vital weed seeds in ground mill feeds. The investigation has shown that, as in previous years bran manufactured by the larger flour mills is comparatively free from weed seeds; but the forty-eight samples of bran collected had an average of two hundred and forty-six weed seeds .per pound. Crushed or ground meals were often found to be in a worse condition, sometimes containing more than eighteen hundred weed seeds par .pound.
These statements 'are enough to convince every one of the importance of careful supervision of this rejected grain which is to be dealt with by the commissioners to be appointed under this Bill. The Minister of Agriculture indicates that Ontario is the greatest sufferer from the purchase of this rejected the weed infested grain from western Canada. Even this year, while the field .crop of Ontario was not as large as those of previous years, the value of that crop almost equalled the fi-eld crop of the three western provinces. These commissioners, dealing as they do with the grading of the grain not only of western Canada, but of the whole of Canada, have, ot ought to have, under their control the disposal of noxious weeds that comprise a large portion of many shipments of grain to the elevators. I believe that there are to-<d)ay in Ontario farms that 'are harder to reclaim from the weeds that have taken possession of them than they were when covered by ' the original forest. The importance of some one in authority having power to deal with this matter cannot, I think, be too strongly impressed on this House. I have not studied the Bill as carefully .as no doubt many members from western Canada have done.

But this particular evil has been so patent to every one in Ontario during the past few years that something has to be done. I believe that in the Inland Revenue . Act provision is made for looking after the seeds contained in feedstuff by inspectors, but such inspectors are altogether too few in number to attend to this. But there is no provision whatever as far as I can And for preventing the sale or distribution of weed seeds in screenings or unground grains. There is scarcely a town or city in which there are not many people who keep a number of fowl and who buy screenings from the elevators in western Canada. The manure from this source is frequently hauled to the farms and distributed in that way to an extent most people hardly realize. I would, therefore, strongly urge on the hon. minister that some provision be made in this Bill which would enable the commissioners to regulate and control this evil, they are in a better position to do so than anybody else. I am satisfied that the time has arrived when so drastic measure must be adopted in order to prevent this evil from spreading throughout the country.


George Eulas Foster: There is no doubt at all about the importance ol tlm subject to which my hon. friend nas alluded, but the means of remedying ^e evil is a little more difficult. I doubt whether the machinery provided by this Bill is the best means for that purpose. I am told that the province of Manitoba absolutely prohibits the sale of these screenings, either from the elevators in the province or the terminal elevators, and has done so the last five years. That would seem to be an effective method of getting rid of the evil in the province of Ontario as well.


Donald Sutherland: What becomes of these screenings?


George Eulas Foster: 90 to 95 per cent of them go to the American market. They are ground into feed and sold into the United States at from $5 to $12 per ton, and the value of the screenings turned out at the terminals would be from $300,000 to $500,000. They are fed to hogs and stock and poultry.


Donald Sutherland: Would not the value of these screenings be largely enhanced by separating the weed seeds from the broken wheat? I think that could be done by putting the screenings through a finer mesh. I have it on good authority that a great many of those weed seeds ground up into bran and shorts are not only unfit for stock but are actually poisonous. I believe that by more careful screening, a larger proportion of these weed seeds could be extracted.	t
Mr. FOSTER (North Toronto) moved that the words ' shall weigh not less than 64 pounds to the bushel1 be added to the section defining the grade of No. 1 peas.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Mr. FOSTER (North Toronto) moved that the words ' shail weigh not less than 62 pounds to the bushel be added to the definition of No. 2 peas, so that these clauses shall read as follow:
No. 1 peas shall be white, clean and sound, not worm eaten and free from bugs, and weigh not less than 64 pounds to the bushel.
Vo. 2 peas shall be reasonably clean and sound, and reasonably free from worm eaten and buggy peas and weigh not less than 62 pounds to the bushel.
No. 3 peas shall be such as are too dirty as to be graded No. 2, or are worm-eaten or huggy, and weigh not less than sixty pounds to the bushel.
Mr. NEELY.: Where does the Minister get those weights?


George Eulas Foster: From the inspectors divisions in Montreal and Toronto.	.


David Bradley Neely: I do not know why the minister is changing the established standard for the weight of peas.


George Eulas Foster: I am not changing the standard; I am putting into an enactment .what are now standard grades in the east. That is all.


David Bradley Neely: As a matter of fact, the farmer has been getting the benefit in all grades ,,of peas in the sixty pound bushel. The minister is raising the standard so far ar. weight is concerned, so that the purchaser of the peas is going to get the advantage of this extra weight. No matter what customs may prevail, no matter what private standards may exist, the legal standard has been 60 pounds to the bushel. It looks to me as if the minister were making a concession to the man who buys and not to the man who raises.


Mr. AIKINS.: How will these weights of eastern Canada affect western Canada?
j Mr- NEELY. My hon. friend from Brandon (Mr. Aikins) as I understand him, is one who deprecates invidious distinctions 'between east and west. This legislation is for the whole of Canada and not for any particular section. We are to legislate for all Canada and not for any particular part of it, and, even though these weights were applied only in the east, yet, as a member of this House, I am as much interested in the farmers of Ontario as in the farmers of the west.


Frank Oliver: The hon. member for Brandon (Mr. Aikins), is mistaken if he thinks that these grades apply only to the



east; they apply all over Canada, as the minister has said, and it is generally admitted. There are other grades that we shall come to, that apply only to the west.


Mr. CURRIE (Simcoe).: The minister is well aware that there are tew peas to be obtained in the country, in Ontario especially, which used to be the great pea section. What weights are proposed?


George Eulas Foster: 1, 2 and 3 grades, 64, 62 and 60 pounds respectively. And the inspector says that in a'll these cases the actual weights are from one to two pounds above that. So, there is plenty of room.	,
Now, with reference to the question ol nomenclature for grades in the western inspection division I proposed to change the name in all these wheat grades from ' Manitoba ' to ' Canada.' It will then read ' No. 1, Canada, Hard Wheat.' This is in pursuance of the discussion we had the other day which was pretty full and in which the view was expressed that the name should be broadened from the sectional to the national. It is proposed^ to carry that through these grades of spring wheat, winter wheat and barley. In reference to flax, I propose instead of the word ' Northwestern ' to insert ' Canada.


Mr SCHAFFNER.: I took exception to this the other day. I was fairly in earnest then, but I am much more in earnest now.
I am more in earnest because I was speaking before without opportunity to consult anybody and, as the saying is, off my own bat. But since then I have talked with many men engaged in business, who understand the importance of a trade-mark better than I do, and perhaps better than many other members of this House. It is an exceedingly important matter, this change of the name from ' Manitoba Hard ' by which our wheat and flour have been known all over the world, and known as surpassing any grade grown elsewhere. I do not wish to detain the House with a long discussion, but I would like the minister to think that over. I cannot see that this change will be of much advantage to my hon. friends from Saskatchewan and Alberta; I cannot see that it makes much difference to them. Another name is to be adopted which is neither that of Saskatchewan nor Alberta. I do not see any advantage in the making the change that would compensate for the disadvantage incurred. It will take a long time for buyers in Europe to understand that this change is made.
The Minister of Trade and Commerce suggests that we should place in brackets the word ' Manitoba '. Well, that would help us out a little. But I cannot agree to use the word * Canada ' alone in designating this grain. If you are going to change Mr. OLIVER.
the word from ' Manitoba ' to some other name, then make it signify the country in which this grain is grown. It certainly does not grow in eastern Canada. I think the name should be either ' Canada Western ' or ' Western Canada ' grain. I suggested ' Western Canada ' the other day, but I will agree to ' Canada Western '. But I do say there must be some further designation than merely to call it ' Canada ' wheat. I would much prefer, and I believe that all commercial men who know the feeling on the English market or where-ever our flour or wheat has been sold, would still prefer to retain the name ' Manitoba '. But if we are going to change it, let us take some name that will designate the wheat properly, and leave no doubt that it is grown in western Canada.


David Bradley Neely: I cannot agree with the hon. gentleman who has just spoken (Mr. Schaffner) that the name ' Manitoba ' should be retained. I think the minister's contention that the broader term should be used is only just and fair to those other provinces of Canada, where wheat is grown similar to the wheat grown in Manitoba. More than that, I think the country generally would derive much more benefit from the production of its grain if the national name of ' Canada ' were used. It would have more effect in advertising this country than the designation by which this hard wheat has been known for so many years in the markets of the world. On the other hand, I do agree with the hon. member for Souris when he says that if the change is to be made there should be another word added to the word ' Canada '. We are not a selfish people in the west, we do not claim to be able to grow apples as they can grow them in Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia; but we do claim that our soil and our climatic conditions are the only soil and climatic conditions adapted to the growing of hard wheat, and we are jealous of the reputation of this grain, and of the reputation of that section of the country where the grain is grown. So I consider that the minister might very well add the word ' West ' without any detriment whatever to the rest of Canada. We would still use the national name, but would designate that particular section of Canada in which the grain was grown, and which I think is justly entitled to the credit that belongs to that part of the country from any advertisement there may be in the name itself.


Donald Sutherland: I cannot say that I admire the assurance of the hon. gentleman who has just spoken (Mr. Neely) in appropriating to ' Western Canadian ' the
credit of being the only place where No. 1 Hard wheat can be grown in Canada. I

want to say that in Ontario we can grow No. 1 Hard wheat, that even in competition with wheat from all over the world, at the Paris International Exhibition in 1900 was awarded the gold medal. This wheat was grown in northern Ontario near New Lxslseard. I believe that in northern Ontario there is a country that will yet be growing millions and millions of bushels of wheat, therefore, I consider the minister is right in changing the word ' Manitoba ' to ' Canadian . I do not think it should he ' Western Canada.' That distinction should be left out. We are all one people here, we have a country of whose possibilities we have as yet no conception. I may say that in the province of Quebec also there is unoccupied land that will in future years be producing immense quantities of wheat, land, both in northern Quebec and in northern Ontario, that is now being opened up by the Transcontinental railway. There is no finer section of land in Canada than that through which that road passes in northern Ontario. The word ' Canadian ' I believe is the proper word to use, because it will do justice to the whole of Canada. It will show that we do not claim that there is only one part of Canada that can grow No. 1 Hard Wheat, and that no other section can. I quite approve the change the minister proposes to make.


Mr ATKINS.: The reason for the change I think is sentimental. If it was going to be productive of any benefit to the wheat producer, then I certainly would support the change. But it is going to be productive of loss to the wheat producer. The Manitoba Wheat has a reputation that has been acquired by years of care and trouble and expense, and if that name is changed, I venture to say that the wheat produced in western Canada will not bring within a few cents at all events the price at which it now sells in the European markets. Therefore, it seems to me we will be getting the benefit of a sentiment at a sacrifice of the price of wheat. The provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta producing the same kind of wheat will get the advantage of the name of ' Manitoba ' as well as that province itself; they produce the same class of wheat and they will get the benefit of that trade name. I have known trade names sometimes to be so valuable that they were stolen and the courts had to intervene to prevent it. It seems rather singular that people would be quite willing to give away a trade name that has such advantages as the trade name ' Manitoba Wheat, Neither can I agree with the last speaker (Mr. Sutherland) that we should adopt the name ' Canadian.' If the same class of wheat was produced all over Canada, then perhaps 88i
there might be some ground for it. But that wheat is not produced in all parts of Canada, and the name would be misleading; it is produced mainly in western Canada. I do not suppose it is produced in British Columbia, but it is produced in the three wheat growing provinces, and that is an additional reason why it would be better to restrict the name to ' Manitoba Wheat,' than to call it * Western Canada Wheat,' because to call it ' Western Canada Wheat ' would include provinces which do not produce that class of wheat. I would much prefer, therefore, to have the name left as it is. But if the majority insist on a change, I certainly would prefer the words ' Western Canada '' to the -word ' Canada.'


John Gillanders Turriff: I do not think either the member for Brandon (Mr Aikins), or the member for South Oxford (Mr. Sutherland), have very good grounds for the line of. argument they have taken. I do not think that dropping the name ' Manitoba ' will affect the price of wheat to any considerable extent. It is a very poor compliment to the English wheat buyers, and the Canadian millers to say that they buy wheat on the name instead of on its intrinsic quality. If the wheat is called ' Western Canada Wheat,' and the old designation is bracketed for the next year or two, as suggested by the minister, you will guard against any loss whatever, and you will protect everybody. I am sure my hon. friends from Manitoba will realize that owing to the actual condition of things, of the total amount of wheat produced on the prairies in future, only a very moderate proportion can be produced in the province of Manitoba.
It would not be fair to the other provinces which will be in the future producing the great bujk of the hard wheat, that it should be named for that one province, which is producing the smaller portion of it, especially when you can give it a name that will be fair to Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, and yet designate it as wheat produced in the western part of Canada. As to wheat produced in British Columbia, there will never be any considerable quantity grown there. With reference to the remarks of the hon. member for South Oxford (Mr. Sutherland), there will no greater objection to calling the wheat ' Western Canadian ' than calling it, as it is at the present time ' Manitoba Hard.' There has been no objection fiVim the wheat growers in Ontario or Quebec to the name Manitoba Hard.' They do not produce Manitoba Hard wheat or wheat of the quality of _' Manitoba Hard.' I do not doubt that in some portions of the northern part of Ontario and Quebec they might grow a little wheat of that quality, this has

only reference to the western provinces of Canada, and there should be no injustice done to anybody. I am, therefore, in favour of the adoption of the name suggested by the minister, but adding to it the word ' western.'


Mr. BLAIN.: 
Frederick Laurence Schaffner: I move that it he amended to read ' Canada Western.'


Frank Oliver: I second the motion. I would think that the purpose of a name is to express an idea or to state a fact and, whether there are questions of sentiment or questions of business, when we are legislating we should think that it is a part of our business, and an important part of our business, to see that our legislation expresses a correct idea and states a fact. There is no doubt that the use of the word ' Manitoba ' as describing wheat that is raised in the western provinces, is not a correct or adequate description. It does not convey an idea, it is not a statement of fact; it is contrary to the fact, indeed.


John Gillanders Turriff: For that reason there clearly should be some name that would be descriptive and common to all the western country which raises -a particular kind of grain. The whole western country, possessing similar soil and a similar climate, naturally has similar products; differing in quality, because ol varying soil and climatic conditions, from like products raised in other parts of Canada. Therefore, it is only reasonable iand right, when we have varying products, that we should give them a name that would be descriptive. As to the name ' Canada or the like, the matter strikes me in this way: We aTe giving a name to a grain described in a certain section of this Act as being raised in a certain section of Canada. If that were the only grain raised in Canada then it would be all right to call it ' Canada ' grain. There is no misstatement of fact or difficulty of idea in speaking of Canadian grapes, or Canadian peaches, but when you speak of Canadian apples there is a great difference between the apples in Nova Scotia, Ontario and British Columbia, and it is only fair and right that these different classes of apples should be described so as to set out their differences such as they may be. So I say in regard to grain. While wheat, barley *and oats are raised throughout. Canada, there is a certain distinctive character to the wheat and the oats particularly, and there is in some degree, I believe, also to the barley that is raised in these prairie provinces' For business reasons, as well as other reasons, which I have already stated, it is desirable that the grains of these prairie provinces should be distinguished by name from grains of like variety raised in other parts of the country. If you use the word ' Canada ' alone .as describing western wheat there is no reason why wheat raised in Ontario should not also go forward as ' Canada ' wheat. It is ' Canada ' wheat as ia matter of fact, and nil the legislation we can put on the statute-book will not prevent it from being Canadian wheat, and the people who *are dealing with that wheat, if it is to their advantage, are entitled to use that *advantage and we cannot prevent them. Now, I think that under these circumstances there is a business reason, from the standpoint' of the trade of the country, as well as the sentimental standpoint, why there should be a distinction in name between- grain raised in eastern Canada and grain raised in western Canada If it were all of the same kind and character there would be no reason for a distinction in the name, but the wheat raised in the prairie provinces, being of a distinctive character from the wheat raised in the rest of the country, it is in the interest of business that there should be a distinctive name. While the name suggested by the hon.

member for Souris (Mr. Schaffner) is not as short as would be desirable it is certainly absolutely descriptive. There could be no question about the wheat that is labelled ' Canada West ' or ' Canada Western ' being properly described and no question about identifying wheat by that name.
The objection that the name is a little long for use might be overcome by providing that the initiais should be used as a contraction and should he a sufficient identification. This would be a solution of what is now really a business difficulty as well as an infringement on reasonable sentiment.


Mr. KNOWLES.: I think the time is opportune for abandoning the name ' Manitoba.' We are changing the name from the Manitoba Grain Act to The Canada Grain Act. If we want simply a name descriptive of the wheat, then the word ' Manitoba ' does not fulfil that requirement. It is a small part of the wheat growing country in the west, it was at one time the only part. I do not share the view that ' Canada West ' should be used. That term at one time was applied to western Ontario, and while it might apply to the grain growing section now, in a few years it might mean British Columbia or the Yukon. We hope that in a very few years the prairie country will be spoken of as the main part of Canada as we think today, in cur modesty, it is. If the people in eastern Canada get any benefit from the use of the word ' Canada ' we do not begrudge it. We are keeping the rest of Canada anyway and if our name is going to help them it is only a small thing to us. I am in favour of having the word ' Canada ' without the adjective ' west.'


Mr. SHARPE (Lisgar).: I feel very strongly that the name should be left as it is at present. Manitoba was the pioneer province of western Canada, it opened the way for the rest of your children -who come further west and why should you wish to change your old father's name? The fact remains that in southern Manitoba is grown the best wheat in Canada to-day.
Some h'on. MEMBERS. Oh, no. Nonsense.


Mr. SHARPE (Lisger).: You may say nonsense, but a lalysis will tell you that the best bread-making wheat comes from southern Manitoba. The trade mark of ' Manitoba ' has become established in relation to our grain and I am strongly in favour of leaving the name as it is now.


George Eulas Foster: If I thought the substitution of Canada for
Manitoba would degrade the quality or lessen the price of the wheat I would hesitate before even advocating the change, but after taking the best advice I could get it does not seem to me it can possibly affect the price. Wheat is bought on its quality and the price will be according to its quality, and although the trade-mark has become familiar as an indication of quality, it is, after all, nothing more than an indication of quality. While there might be disturbance of trade by a sudden change in the name we guard against that by arranging that it shall not come into effect until next season and on the certificate we place after ' Canada,' 'Manitoba.' Commission houses and grain men all over the world are alive to that, information spreads rapidly, and I think that by the first of September of next year no grain buyer in the world would have any confusion in his mind on account of the change in name. The national idea appealed to me to a certain extent on the ground of sentiment. The use of the word Canada could not degrade the quality or value of the grain, but it would be a distinctive name which would take in a larger area than Manitoba. So it would tend to the general advantage of our producers.
There are some here who want the word ' Manitoba ' and nothing else; there are others who want the name ' Canada ' and nothing else. To my mind those who prefer the name ' Canada ' stand on the strongest ground and on the widest platform. Those who want ' Manitoba ' want it because of their love of old associations as well as may he a lingering fear that some confusion may arise. There are others who argue that the word ' Western ' should be put in, and that suggested the term ' Canada Western '. I said when I came down with this Bill to the House that I was not bigoted about non-essentials, and that I wanted to make it the result of consultation with both sides of the House, always with the understanding that the government would be responsible for the Bill when it became an Act. For my (part I have no objection to adapting, as a compromise, the term 'Canada Western'; so that we should have Canada Western No. 1 Hard wheat, and so on. I would commend that as a half-way step. Hitherto we have given everything to our friends from the west. I suppose we must look on them as spoiled children and treat them very kindly.


William D. Staples: I wish again to raise my protest against dropping the name ' Manitoba ', not because we are so jealous of it that we are not prepared to do what is for the general advantage of Canada; hut that name has a commercial value in the

markets of the world. If you are going to adopt the name ' Canada ', I think you could get a better term than ' Western ' to put with it. Why not use the term ' Canada Prairie Wheat '? All of that part of Canada west of Winnipeg to the Rooky Mountains and for some distance east of Winnipeg is known as the prairie west, on which this superior quality of hard wheat is produced. I think the term ' Prairie ' is a better term than ' Western.'


Richard Blain: A similar question to the present one was pretty fully discussed in the House in connection with the Fruit Marks Act. The question arose as to which part of Canada produced the best apples. Some claimed that it was Nova Scotia, some British Columbia, and some the province of Ontario. There was a demand on the part of members from Nova Scotia to continue the words ' Nova Scotia ', and to stamp that name on the barrels of apples which came from that province. It was finally decided to put in the Act the provision that every package found to be fairly and properly packed the inspector was to brand ' No. 1, Inspected Canadian Apples ',
' No. 2, Inspected Canadian Apples ', and so on. The names of all the provinces were left out, and all the apples for export were to be stamped as inspected Canadian apples. That is an example of the former administration adopting a Canadian policy, and for my part I think it is only fair that the same policy should be carried out with respect to wheat, as suggested by the hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce, and that it should be branded as Canadian and not with the name of any section of Canada.


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: How about the commercial value of those apples from different sections of Canada?


Richard Blain: I am bound to give to Manitoba the credit of having gained for our wheat the prominence that it has; but our policy is to do away with the lines of demarcation between the east and the west, and for my part I support the suggestion of the hon. minister.


Mr. HENDERSON.: I am not a resident of Manitoba or Saskatchewan or Alberta, but I think we shall make a mistake if we drop the name ' Manitoba Hard '. There are other countries in the world that produce hard wheat. If I mistake not, The Argentine produces hard wheat, and I think there is hard wheat produced in Russia. Ladoga wheat, which is produced in many parts of the northwest, originally came from Russia


Frank Oliver: It was a soft wheat when it came, and a very poor one.


David Henderson: We hardened it after we grew it in the northwest. My Mr. STAPLES.
point is that in the. British market there is a well-founded meaning of the term ' Manitoba Hard ', and I think we shall make a mistake if we change that name to any other, whether it is ' Western ' or even the larger name ' Canada.' I think we shall lose something in the market that we have now and that we shall not get back for ten or twelve years. The people of Great Britain are very jealous. The sacks will go forward labelled ' Manitoba II aid ' or * Canada Hard '. When they are put upon the market in Great Britain, and the baker is asked to buy a sack of flour called * Canada Hard ', he will say,
' That is not what I want at, all; I want Manitiba Hard, and I will take no other.' You could not make him believe in ten years that ' Canada Hard ' was the same thing as ' Manitoba Hard '. In England people are accustomed to speak of Canadian cheese as American cheese, and if we labelled our cheese Canadian, I think we would lose much. The name ' Manitoba Hard ' is to my mind simply a name. I do not think it belongs to Manitoba any more than to Saskatchewan or to Alberta. Manitoba Hard can be grown in any one of those provinces, although perhaps it can be grown to greater perfection in Manitoba. I say to the people of the west on behalf of the people of the east that I think we shall make a tremendous mistake if we change its name. Our millers in the east want Manitoba Hard.
They may be told that Canada Hard is the same thing, but they will say: Manitoba Hard is what we want, it is what we are accustomed to, and we are not going to buy , any other. Therefore, I would urge that we should go slow and not give away the good thing we have, and we have a good thing in that name. It is worth millions to the people of Canada and the people of the northwest. If you change the name to * Western ' or ' Canada ' it will not bring the same amount of money as if you left the name as it is. I would be sorry to see any change; but if there is to be any change, I would rather simply call it ' hard wheat,' instead of changing the name to ' Canada ' or ' Western.' But I would prefer that we should still cling tc the name Manitoba Hard. Let us keep the advantages we have gained throughout a long series of years. If we change the name, the people of the northwest will be the ones to suffer most, but the people in the east will suffer as well, because they will scarcely know what they are buying. Whether the wheat was raised in the northern or southern regions we want to know that we are buying the kind of wheat known as Manitoba Hard. I hope that the promoter of this Bill will be conservative enough to hold it to the good old name of Manitoba Hard


Mr. ROGERS.: I would like to add a word in support of what has been so well said by my hon. friend from Halton (Mr. Henderson). I entirely agree in every word he has said with regard to this matter. I can see no good purpose than can be served by making a change. If it could be shown that any advantage could be had by making the change proposed, I would be willing to agree to it, but I cannot see any. As has been well said by my hon. friend, we would be liable to create a wrong impression and thereby do a large amount of injury and serve no good purpose. It is undoubted that Manitoba Hard wheat has established its value on the markets of the w-orld. That brand Manitoba Hard, was given in the early days when Manitoba was the pioneer territory producing this hard wheat, and we have from that day until now, endeavoured by our laws, rules and practice to preserve the identity of that wheat in the markets the world over. In those markets it is known as Manitoba Hard, and I do not see what advantage can be gained by changing that name. I do not sav this with a view of attempting to reflect on the wheat grown ir>
Saskatchewan and Alberta, but it nevertheless is a fact that the wheat grown in the Red River Valley of Manitoba is undoubtedly the best milling wheat grown anywhere to-day. If you change the name, you will not bring any benefit to the people of Saskatchewan or Alberta; on the contrary, the further west you go the softer is the wheat, and therefore, you will create a distinction and a difference in the high standard of Manitoba No. 1 Hard, which is recognized the world over, and if you make that change, you will do exactly what my hon. friend from Halton has pointed out; You will bring about a loss to the people of western Canada and serve no good purpose in any other respect.


John Gillanders Turriff: I cannot allow the statement of the hon. the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Rogers) to go unchallenged that southern Manitoba grows the finest *wheat raised in the west. I have heard millers, dozens of them, say that the wheat grown as far west in southern Saskatchewan as wheat is grown-that is right up into the Dirt Hills and to a large extent now in the Dirt Hills

right through Southern Alberta and around the great plains of Weyburn, which is one of the largest shipping points in Canada to-day- the wheat grown in that portion -of Saskatchewan and Alberta is fully equal to that grown in southern Manitoba or any other part of the country, and I have no doubt that many other parts of Saskatchewan further north grow an equally good variety of wheat.


William Henry Sharpe: If my hon. friend will go to Dr. Saunders at the Experimental farm and see the tests of the different wheats grown throughout the whole of Canada, lie will find that the highest tested wheat in the world is that grown in southern Manitoba. I wish to move in amendment to the amendment that the name remain as it is in the Bill at present, namely Manitoba Hard.


Frank Oliver: The hon. member for Macdonald has raised the only objection that could be validly urged against the use of the word Canada Western, namely, that it would include British Columbia, and to that extent the name would not be accurately descriptive, because the wheat raised in British Columbia is not of the same character as that raised on the prairies. But British Columbia is not a country, and in all human probability never will be, which exports wheat, so that the wheat raised in British Columbia does not come into the argument at all. With regard to the use of the word ' Manitoba ' and the effect which would follow the dropping of that word out of the grades of wheat, I have before me the Manitoba ' Free Press ' of February 7, giving a list of the market prices for wheat. The prices are given for fifteen of the grades of wheat on the Winnipeg market, and in none of those grades will be found the description ' Manitoba,* showing conclusively that, as a matter of actual practice in grading wheat, the use of the word ' Manitoba ' is not significant to any serious extent.


William Henry Sharpe: In the province itself?


Frank Oliver: The wheat is sold as Northern and not as Manitoba wheat. The word ' Manitoba ' is not used generally speaking in the market report. I am quite aware that there are some brands of flour which use the word ' Alanitoba,' but as a descriptive term for a particular class of export wheat produced in the prairie provinces it has practically no significance at this time, if the market reports found in the public journals are any guide of value in describing wheat. I give you here seventeen different grades of prairie wheat, in none of which is the word ' Alanitoba ' used. When we come to oats, the description is ' Canada Western,' in the contracted form of' C.W.' When we come to winter wheat the words ' Alberta Red ' are used. So, I think it is clear that, as a descriptive term 'Canada Western ' comes closest to giving a description that wdll be in accordance with the facts and will be absolutely intelligible to the business world and avoid confusion in business transactions.


William D. Staples: Will the hon. gentleman (Air. Oliver) drop the word ' Alberta.'?


Frank Oliver: Certainly, what I want to get at is a term that will be descriptive of and common to all the grain that is raised in the prairie provinces. In 'Canada Western ' we havo a name that is accurately descriptive, is not cumbersome, can be easily contracted and its use, on the evidence of the market reports, will not seriously clash with the terms used in the market quotations.


William D. Staples: Why not adopt the word ' prairie T?	.


Frank Oliver: The word ' prairie ' is more thoroughly descriptive than any of them, and if there were any considerable willingness in the House to take that word, I would agree.


William D. Staples: I would only suggest that if the House is bound to defeat the word ' Manitoba.'


Frank Oliver: I am quite willing to accept the word 'prairie'; but, as the minister lias expressed his willingness to accept the name ' Canada Western,' then, to follow a form of expression of my hon. friend from Lincoln (Mr. Lancaster), even if the minister does agree with that view, I still think it right.


Mr. THOMSON (Qu'Appelle).: The parallel of the case of fruit suggested by the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Blain) is no parallel at all. The same kind of fruit is grown all over Canada, but that is not the case with regard to wheat and other grain.


Richard Blain: Will the hon. gentleman pardon me? He knows that there are no apples grown in Manitoba, Saskatchewan or Alberta


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.


Richard Blain: Hon. members should wait until I finish my sentence, I say there are no apples grown in Manitoba, Alberta or Saskatchewan for the export trade that I know anything about.


Mr. KYTE.: There are none grown in Canada so good as those grown in Nova Scotia.


Levi Thomson: I do not think the explanation of the hon. member (Mr. Blain) shows that there is a parallel between the case of fruit and that of wheat. It is true, some places in Canada do not ship apples, but the apples that are shipped from aill over Canada are designated in the one way; and, while there may be differences, and while the representative of each district contends that the product of his district is the best


Richard Blain: Does not that apply to wheat?


Levi Thomson: No, by this very Bill you enact that it shall not Mr. STAPLES.
apply to wheat, for those grades apply only to the western inspection division. With regard to the word ' Manitoba,' while I sympathize with my hon. friends from that province who do not like the name changed, yet, outside of the sentiment of the thing, I do not think the change will amount to much. I agree with the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Foster) that if he inserts * Manitoba ' in brackets, it will be needed only for the time. I am growing *wheat in the western country, but I am not a bit alarmed about the change of name, even if we do not insert the word ' Manitoba ' in brackets. I expect to sell my wheat according to quality and not according to name, and I shall not lose a cent a bushel-or even part of a cent a bushel- because it is not called ' Manitoba,' I do not care what you call it-


William D. Staples: How do you like the word ' prairie ' ?


Levi Thomson: I do not think we had better bring up fresh names; we have enough. Now, as to the claim of the Manitoba people that they market a superior wheat, I think they should produce more evidence before they claim that our wheat is inferior to their own, which is practically what they claim. The Thous-and-dollar prize in Chicago went to Northern Saskatchewan wheat, and I think we can do it again.


George Eulas Foster: I do not wish to go on with this Bill after six o'clock, so I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again. Between now and the time when we take this Bill up again, we can think about the names of wheat.
Progress reported.
At six o'ciock, House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.



PRIVATE BILL.


[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 50) respecting the Ontario and Ottawa Railway Company.-Mr. Currie.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 94) respecting the Windsor, Chatham and London Railway Company.- Mr. Wilcox.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. WHITE (Leeds) moved that the House go into Committee of Supply.
Motion agreed to, and House went into Committee of Supply.

Mr. MONK.: There was an item reserved in Harbours and Rivers generally, an item for Quebec.
Quebec-harbours, rivers and bridges-general repairs and improvements, $60,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Public Works (Mr. Monk) if the breakwater at Anse-au-Canard, Gaspe, for which an amount was voted in the estimates, will be built. I understand that tenders were invited some months ago for the construction of that breakwater and that, as appears by an answer given by the hon. gentleman to a question which I put some weeks ago, the tenderer had not made the necessary deposit, the tenders were, of course cancelled, new tenders were invited and on that second occasion the tender was considered too high for the department. Since that time nothing has been done. I received a letter to-day from a merchant of Newport, county of Gaspe, because Anse-au-Canard is one of the coves of Newport, and he states that he has learned on good authority that the work will hot be proceeded with. I would like to know from the hon. gentleman if any decision has been reached by the department in regard to that work. This is one of the public works in the county of Gaspe. I take an interest in 'those works Decause I have been somewhat associated with that county for fifteen years. There is another work in the county of Gaspe which does not appear in the list of items. I reier to the Gaspe landing pier. My hon. friend will remember that some three years ago a large amount was provided in the estimates for the construction of that pier, a contract was entered into with the firm of Dussauit of Levis or Quebec, I am not sure which. The work has been started and not seeing anything in the main estimates perhaps the hon. gentleman would let me know if it is his intention to place something in the supplementary estimates for this year? I may tell my hon. friend that Gaspe is the terminus of the Gaspe railway, better known as the Atlantic, Quebec and Western. The Atlantic Quebec and Western railway was started a few years ago. It runs from Paspebiac, or New Carlisle, for a distance of about 105 miles to Gaspe Basin. It is a first-class railway. It has been built at a cost to the company of a sum that is nearer $5,000,000 than $4,500,000. The company, in order to settle the railway position in the peninsula of Gaspe, has acquired the other railway, well known as the Atlantic and Lake Superior railway, so that to-day you have a continuous railway running from Metapedia on the Intercolonial railway as far as Gaspe Basin a distance of over 200 miles. The new company has made very substantia] repairs to
the old road and this coming year more repairs are provided for in its estimates. It has been the aim of the company from the beginning, and the hope of the people of Gaspe, to have a direct ocean connection between Gaspe and Liverpool or some port in Ireland. Steamers, if they were running between Liverpool and Gaspe, would, notwithstanding the claims of St. John, Halifax and Quebec, run by the shortest route, and, as regards the carriage of the mails, could afford a much better service to Canada than that which is at present provided. However, that is only for the future; let us see if, for the present, the government intends to build the landing pier at Gaspe. A large amount was provided for the construction of the landing pier. The Gaspe company intends to run its trains as far as the water's edge. Though I have no more political interest in my old constituency I yet look upon that work as a national work, at least as far as my native province is concerned. The peninsula of Gaspe is probably the first land that was sighted by the discoverers of Canada when first they came to the St. Lawrence river; in fact, looking at the archives the other day, I read a description of a trip made into the Bay of Gaspe by no less a traveller than Jacques Cartier himself. He called at a place well known in the country as Fontenelle. There he planted a cross and took possession of the soil in the name of God and the King of France. But this peninsula, although exceedingly wealthy in all sorts of resources, rich in timber, in minerals and in agriculture, has been tremendously neglected. That was due not so much to the fault of the governments of the day, although they were partly responsible for the state of affairs there, as to the existence of a company well known in the maritime provinces and on the coast of the Labradors. I refer to the Robin firm of Jersey.
This is a great company, which may in some-respects be compared to the Hudson's Bay Company. The Hudson's Bay Company were engaged in the pursuit of fur-bearing animals while the Robins were engaged in the fisheries of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. They have established in the gulf I do not know how many agencies. The oldest establishments are situated in the counties of Gaspe and Bonaventure. During the last 150 years they have extended considerably and now their stores and establishments are dotting the shores of the St. Lawrence river and the gulf. The Robins were anxious to keep the people to the fishing industry and they knew that the construction of a railway would perhaps induce the fishermen to go abroad and they have bitterly opposed, during half a century, the construction of any railway on that coast. I do not say that in disparagement of the

business methods of the Robins firm. They were, I suppose, working for No. 1. At the same time they prevented the people of Gaspe from getting their due in whatever government grants were given at the time for the expansion of the country. Gaspe is a very rich peninsula, and the construction of this railway will give the county an enormous development. The object of the company was undoubtedly to keep the people there and not allow them to go into any lumbering operations outside of the peninsula, in fact I do not think it is too strong to say they desired to keep them in a state of semislavery. In fact in 1896 when I was first elected for Gaspe, I travelled for many days along the 200 miles of coast in that county, and I found in many little places, in the little coves bordering the coast, old men and young men who had never seen the colour of a red cent in their lives. They were fishing and selling the fish to the Robin firm, receiving in return merchandise or goods. I obtained from the government of the day the establishment of a steamer service running between Montreal, Quebec and these various ports on the coast, in order to give a little more competition to the merchants in that far-away district. The result was most beneficial, but it was only the beginning. It was only when the construction of the railway was started that a new era dawned on the coast of Gaspe. The railway after many vicissitudes has been completed. It took about ten years of hard work on the part of the then member for the county of Gaspe to secure the completion of that road through federal and local subsidies.
My hon. friend from St. John (Mr. Pugs-ley), decided upon a landing pier at the point called Sandy Beach. With his knowledge of _ the conditions in that section of the maritime provinces, he could appreciate the value and importance of that new feeder to the Intercolonial railway. In fact, the railway at Gaspe will, in the near future I arr. quite sure, through its connections with the Intercolonial railway, and at the boundary line with railways in the State of Maine, be an excellent railway for Canada and that section of the country as it will bring it into close touch with the United States, New Brunswick, and that part of the province of Quebec which is near the Gulf of St. Lawrence. This landing pier was decided upon at the terminus of the railway the contract was given, a large amount was voted, but the pier is not completed, and I see nothing in the estimates to complete it. I hope, however, that in the supplementary estimates the hon. gentleman will put in an amount sufficient to complete it, As I have said, I have no political affiliations with the county, I have only rov reminis-Mr. LEMIEUX.
cences to connect me with it, and they are of the happiest nature. Although I was defeated at the last general election, I bear no illwill to the electors of that constituency which supported me during 15 years. But I am very much interested in the completion of that railway, and I see in the completion of the landing pier, the termination of a work which I do not hesitate to qualify as one of national importance.


Mr. BRODER.: What is the length of file branch?


Rodolphe Lemieux: It is over 200 miles. It connects with the Intercolonial railway at Metapedia, at the point where the Intercolonial railway crosses the Restigouche river into Quebec. The first 100 miles were built many years ago, and the railroad was well known as the Baie des Chaleurs railway. Later, it passed to another company, and took the name of the Atlantic and Lake Superior railway. It was built as far as Paspebiac. The charter of the company gave it the right to build as far as Gaspe basin, 102 miles further, but as that first company at that time, was almost insolvent, I asked parliament to grant another charter to another company, which was known as the Atlantic and Lake Superior railwav company. This company built from the terminus of the old company, New Carlyle to Gaspe basin, has merged with the old, and it is now one trunk line running between Metapedia and Gaspe basin. The company has had many vicissitudes and for some time it was feared that it would stop its operations.
But fortunately the company is now in the hands of a strong organization in London, having at its head Lord Ranfurly, exGovernor of New Zealand, who came to Canada and inspected the road, and did not hesitate to take charge of the whole system. The company even this winter has been able to operate except for a few days, and I know, from the reports of the engineers in the Department of Railway and Canals, that it is a first-class railway. It was built by English engineers, and the only reproach to offer in regard to it is that it was built perhaps in a little too costly a way. At all events, it awaits only the completion of the landing pier at Sandy Beach in order to be fully equipped. I would like to know from the hon. gentleman if he has come to a decision in the matter, and if we may expect that there will be in the supplementary estimates an amount sufficient to complete the work.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I am anxious to give my hon. friend all the information possible in regard to the two questions he has put. The first has reference to the breakwater at Anse-au-Canard. The second question
FEBRUARY 9, 191a
has reference to the landing pier at Gaspe Basin at the terminus of the railway to which he has referred. Of course, it is more easy to explain the items for which credits are asked than to explain the reasons why the estimates submitted do not contain further items. However, I believe that my hon. friend has correctly stated what happened at Anse-au-Canard. Tenders were called for, and they were found to he too high. Other tenders have been called for, and I believe that the amounts of the tenders exceeded the amount claimed originally by the government for the execution of tire work. A number of works were projected, regarding which some calculations were made under the late government which are not to be found in these estimates. Naturally a new government coming in to exercise power under different circumstances and perhaps with a different view as to these different works, could not be expected to see absolutely eye to eye with the previous government in regard to each and every one of these works. I have mentioned on more than one occasion to the committee that we found ourselves confronted with I think larger demands than have ever been made in the past with respect to our principal shipping ports, our national ports, which were referred to at length in the reports of the Transportation Commission, dating back to 1903, and it has become to me evident, and it seems so to the government, that we must take steps without any delay to equip those national ports to meet present requirements. We are behind the times. We are far behind our American neighbours, in the equipment of our ports, and unless we make speedy preparation to secure the amount of trade to which we are legitimately entitled, we shall see that trade go gradually to the United States. AVe have found ourselves this year under the necessity of equipping with as great speed as possible our Atlantic ports, and the prospective opening of tihe Panama canal has made it necessary for us to prepare for considerable expenditure on our Pacific ports.
Nevertheless, in spite of these rather pressing requirements, the government is anxious to provide for local necessities as well, as far as that may be possible. As regards the peninsula of Gaspd, what my hon. friend has stated is perfectly true; and I may say that the hon. member who now represents the county of Gaspe, and who is I believe domiciled there, has brought to my attention on many occasions the needs of that county, which was to a certain extent unnecessary m my ease,' because I have had occasion to visit that important territory, and have become convinced by personal inspection and by much
that has been written of extreme interest with regard to its possibilities. There is room, we are told, within the Gaspe peninsula for over 50 thriving settlements still to be founded and developed; there are immense fisheries all around it; it has lumber wealth, mineral wealth, oil, and wealth of every other kind. The railway along the coast to which my hon. friend has referred will at least contribute to open up that peninsula. There is still the interior to be developed, however. The port of Gaspe is an important port, and there are other ports along that coast which it is claimed could be kept -open all winter. The landing pier at Gaspe Basin has certainly received the attention of the government, and I hope and expect to be able in the supplementary estimates to provide for the final execution of what work remains to be done. That will depend on what will be placed at the disposal of the department for the completion of those very important works which we desire to carry out as soon as practicable.


Mr. PUGSLEY.: T think it is due to the committee that some explanation should be given why there is no item in the estimates for the purpose of completing this work, because a contract was let by myself as Minister of Public Works pursuant to the authority of parliament, a portion of the work has been done, and the contractor will be entitled to go on with the work and receive his pay. My hon. friend is aware that in these main estimates provision was made for all works which were under way, I think without exception.
My hon. friend's attention was called to one or two when these estimates were under consideration before, and he says that if they had been omitted through an oversight he would restore them in the supplementary estimates. In the estimates which he brought down, and which had been prepared by the late government, for the year ending 31st March, he included an amount of $87,500 for this wharf. Surely he ought to be able to tell us why that amount was left out, whether intentionally or by mistake. He has told us that the hon. member for Gaspe had called his attention frequently to the necessity of completing this wharf. Then why did he omit this item? As this work was under contract, he must recognize that the committee is entitled to some explanation.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: If the facts are as my hon. friend has stated them, it is a case of omission, and will be provided for in the sup-plementaries. My hon. friend will admit, I suppose, that it is possible to make some omissions. In all cases of works under contract, my instructions were that they must be provided for.


Mr. SINCLAIR.: The committee have some reason to complain with regard to the information the hon. minister is giving us concerning items that have been dropped from the estimates. I can quite understand that he cannot be prepared to give reasons why certain new works, that were never projected up to the present, are not provided for. But in the case of works which have been examined and reported on, and for the construction of which provision was made last year, we are entitled to some explanation. In my own province about two thirds of the whole estimates of last year have disappeared altogether from the present estimates. The House committed itself to the expenditure on these works on two several occasions. The late government laid these items before the House and got five-twelfths voted. Then the incoming government laid the same items before the House last December, and got the remaining seven-twelfths voted. In some cases tenders had been called for, but when we come now to examine the main estimates, brought down after recess, we find a great many of these items have disappeared altogether, and the minister does not appear to know why. I drew his attention on two occasions to the item of the extension of a breakwater at New Harbour in my own constituency, and have not yet been able to get any Teason why that item was dropped. I have no doubt that if the hon. minister would look into the reports and examine what his own engineers have said, he would not agree that this should have been struck from the estimates. That breakwater was started a great many years ago, it was built a part of the way out into the harbour. It became too small for the requirements of the people, the number of boats now fishing there could not be sheltered by the breakwater as it stands to-day, and an expenditure of $10,000 was voted last year for the purpose of extending that work. It is a very urgent work in my county. I have been asked by the people for some explanation why the item has been dropped, but have not been able to get any. In Nova Scotia out of $1,300,000, voted last year, two thirds of the whole has disappeared, and the minister does not explain why.


John Allister Currie: Is not the hon. gentleman losing sight of the fact that although these items appeared in the estimates last year they were not voted by this House? There were 400 docks in Nova Scotia which the House refused to vote.


William Pugsley: These items I refer to were absolutely voted, all of them.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: My hon. friend is an old parliamentarian, and I -would call his attention to the fact that we are Slightly ou.t-


Frederick Debartzch Monk: side the subject under discussion We did not reserve any item from Quebec. We did reserve an item in Ontario for harbours and rivers in order to allow the members from that province to offer any observations they might judge fit. When the question was put with regard to Gaspe basin I thought it better to answer it, but the question which the hon. member for Guys-borough (Mr. Sinclair) has put to me I have answered very often.


John Howard Sinclair: I do not think the hon. gentleman has answered it at all. He has given no reason why that item was struck from the estimates.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It seemed to me I have answered in the only way possible. It is not an argument to say that a public work has been reported on favourably by the departmental officer, that all, the preliminaries have been gone through and that the previous parliament voted an amount for the execution of that work. Parliament may approve of an appropriation, but if nothing was done with it, the new parliament can consider it as not having been utilized and can set aside that appropriation and vote another one. When the present government came into power there were a number of works in the estimates, five-twelfths of the amount for which had been voted, and the House will remember that the whole of the previous year's estimates were passed by parliament. That, however, did not entail on this government the necessity of carrying ou-t these works. Every year amounts are voted by parliament that are not expended, and those votes pass out of existence. It is absurd to pretend that at present the government is obliged to justify the leaving out of these works, the moneys for which bad been voted but never expended. What answer could I give my hon. friend. I could not explain to him what occurred in council when these particular items came up for discussion, if they were discussed at all. I can only give reasons for the appropriations that are submitted. It is quite open for any lion, member to criticize these estimates by comparison.
I submit that there is no special duty upon me at this stage to explain why previous appropriations that do not appear again in the estimates have been left out. That would be an impassible task. A number of these [DOT]appropriations being considered by the government, were set aside. New estimates have been placed before the House for other works deemed more necessary and urgent. While I am willing to give all the information at my command, I have not come here to explain why public works for which no appropriations are asked are not in the programme of the government.
[DOT]2793


William Pugsley: I think my Ron. friend (Mr. Monk) does not quite recognize the rights of parliament in this matter. He seems to assume that whatever the government does is right.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: By no means; I am too old in this business to have any such opinion as that.


William Pugsley: See the extraordinary position in which the hon. gentleman places parliament. In the estimates which he submitted to this parliament, he asked for an appropriation for Nova. 'Scotia of $1,309,166. Hon. members may have voted for other public works throughout Canada, having in view that justice was being done by that province. (Because, after all, in endeavouring to discharge one's duty in connection with the estimates, one must have regard to the necessities and claims of the different provinces). The hon. minister will remember that, when he asked for the part of this vote of $1,309,166 not already voted, I called his attention to the fact that these were substantially the same items as had been submitted to parliament by the late government. He agreed. I said: We take it for granted that, speaking in the main, the government, in asking parliament for this vote, intends to go on with these works-of course, is not bound to go on with every item if subsequent reports should show that it was not necessary. We voted tire estimates on that understanding. That was the pledge made to parliament. Now he comes and, without rhyme or reason, reduces the vote for Nova Scotia from $1,309,166 to $445,000-leaves out two-thirds of the amount for which lie solemnly asked.
It looks like trifling with the House. Parliament would not have voted these amounts if it had supposed that the government had no intention of going on with the work, or if it had supposed that he was going to discriminate against in ova Scotia -and the same remai-k applies to my own province of New Brunswick, whose vote under this head is cut down from $800,000 to a little over $200,000, the total appropriations, including those on capital and on revenue account being reduced from $1,800,000 to $1,200,000. Has the hon. gentleman discovered that these works are unnecessary? Has he examined the reports of the engineers? It seems to me he is not discharging the duties he took upon himself when he said that the government recognized the utility of these works, and would proceed with them, and parliament voted the money.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: The hon. gentleman's (Mr. Pugsley) memory I think is at fault. Those who were present at the time the seven-twelfths estimates were put through, will remember that they were put through without explanation, merely the balance of the year's estimates, and there was .scarcely any discussion. But even if matters were as the hon. gentleman has presented them, yet, the discussion of one year's estimates is entirely different from that of the following year. When these estimates were being prepared, the government was called upon to formulate its policy, if I may use that expression, with regard to each of these public works. I may say to my hon. friend, that if there have been any heart-burnings or omissions, the supplementary estimates will be found to be as satisfactory as possible.


John Howard Sinclair: I would like to have some better explanation from the Minister of Public Works than he has given. I am asked by the people in my county for an explanation of the omission of this item, and I have not been able to give it. I have to tell the people that the former government agreed to make that expenditure, also that the principle was agreed to by this parliament by voting the seven-twelfths of the appropriation last December; but. when I ask the minister why he has dropped the matter, I am only told that I must not ask such an absurd question. I hope the minister does not seriously mean that I am to tell the people that it is an absurd thing for me to ask why important items like this have been dropped. If I could persuade him to read the papers and go into the matter seriously, I would leave it to his own judgment whether he should not go on to complete these works. We have spent some $27,000 in connection with the protection of that harbour. It is in an exposed part of the coast and the completion of that harbour is much needed. If it is the policy of my hon. friend to build no public works in counties represented by Liberals, of course, there is no help for it, the work will have to remain unfinished. But I hope that when the supplementary estimates come down, we shall find that he has given censideration to the matter. But I would like him to give to-night some more satisfactory explanation than that which he has given.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: There is not a single harbour in the country where the work is finally completed. The government is endeavouring to complete work in all the harbours as soon as possible. In the case to which the hon. gentleman (Mr. Sinclair) refers, the government has not seen its way clear to continue that work at the present moment. The reason that he supposes-that the counties represented by a member who is not friendly to the government are discriminated against has never entered my consideration.
But it happens, as my hon. friend knows, that appropriations are made for several * years and are not used. In cases where the

works were actually begun, we are continuing them. Where contracts were made we are keeping faith with the contractor.


John Howard Sinclair: Does the hon. gentleman say that if a different result had happened in Guysborough, and a supporter of the government had been sent here, he would have struck that item out of the estimates?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I can tell my hon. friend that at the present moment members on this side of the House are complaining that we have struck a number of items out of the estimates which concern their counties, and which were in previous estimates.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I may tell my hon. friend that not only will there be one railway having its terminus at Gaspe, but there is another railway which is now under construction, partly in the county of Rimouski, and partly in the county of Gaspe.	There is a railway which was
started a few years ago at St. Flavie, and has now reached Matane in the county of Rimouski, and from Matane I understand it is the intention of the company, a very substantial company, to build to the village .of Cap Chats, and as far as Gaspe Basin. I think it is the intention of the company to have a port at Mont Louis which at all times of the year is an open harbour, according to statements made by navigators of experience. Then from Mont Louis this railway would join the main line of the Atlantic, Quebec and Lake Superior, using the Atlantic pier as a terminus. The port of Gaspe is an open port at least nine months and a half during the year. In seven seasons out of ten Gaspe is open the whole year round, practically it is open all winter. I do not know what is the case this year, but I have known ships sailing to and fro from the port of Gaspe several months after December. I wish also to refer to another matter connected with the terminus. The late government had granted a certain amount for the construction of a road leading towards the terminus on the coast. If my hon. friend will look at the map of Gaspe he will see that the coast is indented, and the largest indentation is at Gaspe where the arm of the sea practically divides the peninsula in two. Now this bras de mer prevents the people on the other side from reaching the railway, and they have to go a long distance before they reach the landing pier. The population on that side of the peninsula is not so large as on the other side, but it is quite large. The road which was provided by the ex-Minister of Public Works gave to the people of that section of the peninsula a commodious route, which enabled them to reach the landing pier. I understand that work was started some months ago. I know the sen-Mr. MONK.
timents of my colleague from Gaspe on that subject, and I specially commended this work to his care after the election. I hope my hon. friend will take note of that fact. The road which starts at Ste. Ma-jorique, and goes towards its terminus, is of great importance to the people there, and one might say that it is part and parcel of the terminus.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: My hon. friend the sitting member for that constituency has pointed out to me the necessity for terminating these works, and has done so with so much insistence that I am afraid that, out of sheer exhaustion, I shall have to give way.


Mr. CHISHOLM (Antigonish).: From the discussion we have had, and the explanations the minister has given on these items in the estimates prepared by the late government and afterwards approved by this government, but which he has dropped, it would seem to be a fair inference that the present government were not disposed to give any promise of the performance of these works at a later date. But the minister has held out a hope that when the supplementary estimates come down a great many of these appropriations asked for at the present time, and that were in the estimates last year, will likely re-ap-pear. But he has not explained why these items were allowed to drop after receiving the approval of this parliament some months ago. If it were not proper that these appropriations should have been made, then when the minister prepared his estimates he should have had before him information which would justify him in dropping such as were not retained, and he should have had the reports of his engineers as to the works that were of a pressing character. I can understand that in the old estimates, there were votes for new works of which, under the circumstances, he might feel constrained to delay tlie construction until a later period. But where these appropriations were for repairs, for works begun but not completed, and he had his reports to that effect, and the man who prepared the estimates for him saw the necessity of going on with these works, as is evidenced by 'the fact that they appeared in his estimates, I say it is up to the minister to explain why he dropped them. My hon. friend from Guysborough (Mr. Sinclair) has suggested that if the minister would take the House more freely into his confidence, and would tell us which of these dropped in the estimates last year he proposed to have in the sup-plementaries, then we would be able to get along much faster.
A great deal of the discussion could be avoided and time saved, if the minister would tell us what he proposes to do with regard to these -works. In the county which

I have the honour to represent, there are over a dozen works, for which appropriations were made in last year's estimates, in some cases for the maintenance of works already constructed and in others for slight extensions to make the works of service to the community. All of these items, with the exception of two, have been dropped. They are not new works. There are a number of other works that I asked the department to have attended to, which are new works. The minister could very well say that these could not be attended to this year. But these works, to which I refer, were provided for in the estimates last year, and they were approved of by members on the other side of the House, when they agreed to vote seven-twelfths of the amounts appropriated for them a couple of months ago when last year's estimates were voted on. If the minister would explain that he intends to bring down these items in the supplementary estimates the grievance would be remedied. When last this matter was up for consideration, I asked him if these items would he in the estimates, but he evaded my question. I think that my hon. friend from Guysborough (Mr. Sinclair) is quite right in stating that we have not yet been able to get from the minister such information as we are entitled to. The minister states that to reply to our question would necessitate him telling us what took place in council. Surely he does not mean to tell us that in council, when these items were up for consid-deration, he was told:	You will have to
cut out these items in Nova Scotia in order thal the national ports shall receive proper treatment. Surely he is not going to confess that he was weak enough to surrender and leave out these items which are of such vital interest to the fishermen and other residents of the county which I represent. The Minister of Militia can get all the appropriations he wants. 1 observe that he finds no difficulty in getting the large appropriations which he demands. Yet, these little works in the province of Nova Scotia are neglected. To some hon. gentlemen on the other side these may seem of very little importance. It is quite right that the national ports should be attended to, but look at the conditions along the shores of Nova Scotia. A great many of these places are distant from the railway, from 20 to 50 miles, the means of communication they have is by water, and they require these little wharfs and breakwaters along the shore which some of_ our friends opposite have in the past minimized. I remember that the hon. member for Montreal, St. Antoine (Mr. Ames), used to have a set of photographs, of works in the maritime provinces. I do not know where they came from, but, they were supposed to represent some of the harbours and coves down in Nova Scotia.
Most of them were the figments of his own imagination, I have no doubt. He held . them up to ridicule, but these hon. gentlemen opposite minimize the importance of these works along the shores of Nova Scotia, because they were trifling in cost. Is that a reason why the minister should drop them or fail to see that they are provided for? Thirty-four thousand dollars was voted the year before last for works in the county which I have the honour to represent, a good many of which items were revotes of the year before that. It is only a very trifling amount, yet it covers a dozen different places and it means convenience and accommodation for hundreds and hundreds of people, a great many of whom are engaged in the fishing industry and it accommodates others who have to use these ports for the purpose of transportation. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that the minister should frankly answer the question which had been put to him. I read a list of places when this matter was up the last time, for which appropriations are desired and he promised to take the matter into his consideration and give me an answer.
I have heard nothing since. My hon. friend from Guysborough has done likewise. If the minister would tell us frankly that these items are dropped because he did not want to allow the late government to get credit in the country for providing 'thf se works and that he intended to provide for them later on when the supplementary estimates came on so that somebody else might get the credit for having secured these works a great deal of our anxiety will have been ended.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: My hon. friend offers a very great temptation. If I can tell him that I have provided for the public works of his county in the supplementary estimates ihe work of the committee will be much shortened. I know what that means but I am afraid I must resist the temptation. I cannot at this moment tell my hon. friend what provisions will be made in the supplementary estimates. Nor is it relevant to the present discussion. I could not do it under any circumstances.
I have told my hon. friend also several times since these estimates were under consideration, when I was asked in regard to leaving out public works in the county of Inverness, that my hon. friend refused to name a superintendent of worxs. I have a memorandum in my office which I will bring here for a number of these works where the district engineer reported that, although the amount had been voted by parliament, and he had applied to the sitting member for a superintendent of works, he had refused to give any answer.


William Chisholm: It is not the county of Inverness that I have the honour to represent. It is a much better county-the county of Antigonish.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: My hon. friend will pardon me; I am not as familiar with Nova Scotia as he is There are several instances where the district engineer thought the sitting member did not find the work important enough to indicate to him a superintendent of works. I give that as an instance why the minister might naturally conclude that the work is not necessary.


William Chisholm: I think the minister has got the two counties confounded. As far as Antigonish is concerned you cannot produce any evidence from the district engineer or anybody else of the fact that I refused to name a foreman.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I think it is Mr. Bernas-coni who is the district engineer.


William Chisholm: No, he is at North Sydney, Cape Breton. Mr. Millidge is the district engineer there.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I will look up the memorandum. I was under the impression that although he had applied for a superintendent of these works he had teceived no nomination. However, that is not the main point at issue. Where works were begun, where there was any aontract, where there was an obligation upon the government to carry out the engagements of the previous administration, these works have been provided for, or they will be in the supplementary estimate's. They have to be provided for because the government is not free; it has to keep faith. But, where the whole matter was open, I submit to the committee that the government was free to prepare its estimates as it thought fit, just the same as the government is free to prepare its estimates without reference to the estimates of the year before. The government is perfectly at liberty to follow the estimates of the previous year or to change them. It is a new operation every year. The minister must be prepared to justify those items for which he asks a credit from parliament. It must be evident that the 'whole discussion of a previous debate cannot be reopened at this stage.


William Chisholm: The minister has conveyed the impression that the failure in going ahead with these works was due to my neglect in not complying with the request to name a clerk of works. I give that information which he has received the most emphatic contra diction. In no case did I refuse to name Mr. MONK,
a clerk of works with perhaps one exception. He referred the other evening to the Mc-Ara's Creek work and said that the engineer had asked me to name a clerk of works. Perhaps that is correct, but the reason was that only five-twelfths of the money was available and it would be useless to start the work with only five-twelfths of the amount required on hand.
The work would be stopped when the money was exhausted and the five-twelfths might be wasted. I refused to name a foreman, in that particular case, and that case alone. Then too it was on the eve of an election, and I did not think it was the right thing to start these works then, it would be said they were being use for election purposes, and the county of Antigonish is not susceptible to that kind of influence, and cannot be brought to support the government by the refusal of public works. The people are not built that way, they are too independent for that.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend from Russell (Mr. Murphy) is not here to-night, and he wished to speak upon a work in Ontario. Could it be arranged that on any item an hon. member might be allowed to speak about this Ontario work?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Certainly.


Mr. McIIENZIE.: I wrote a note to the minister informing him that I desired information about a number of small works in my county. The minister has just said that he is not very familiar with the geography of Nova Scotia. The county which I represent has not a large population, but it has a tremendous coast line, perhaps as as long as any other county in Canada, so we have quite a number of small works such as wharfs and breakwaters. The first *section of the coast extends from the head of East bay to the Grand Narrows, and then you follow along the sea coast to North Sydney. On the other side of the Bras d'Or lakes there is another 75 miles of sea coast, all in my county. There is a large island in the centre of the Bras-d'Or lakes with a coast line of 70 miles, and there is the regular Atlantic sea coast of 150 miles. All of these stretches of sea coast are fishing grounds, and all are more or less exposed to the terrors of the Atlantic ocean. The minister will thus understand why we seek the opening of larger harbours to enable our people to go out and fish and return to shore with some degree of safety. Breakwaters have been built during the last 15 years at a number of places along the shore. Before their construction the only boat the fishermen could use was such a boat as could be hauled up over the beach away from the surf in the evening, shoved out in the morning and reballasted. Since the construction of the breakwaters they have been able to use fairly good sized

schooners, and in many instances gasolene boats which take shelter in some of the little harbours we have made, or behind the breakwaters. I am sorry that I haYe the same complaint as other members from Nova Scotia that many works which have been started are dropped out altogether. For instance the wharf at East bay, which is almost finished, built by day work and to cost only $4,000, cannot be utilized as it requires a little further work. Then at Rose Point an old wharf built under the Macdonald government requires repairs, the material was on the ground, but it has been left out of the estimates. I cannot believe that Mr. Bernasconi, the chief engineer in that pai;t of the country, would report that works which were halfway finished should be dropped.
I picked out the items for which the *money was voted in the estimates of last year, and I sent the list to the minister on the 6th of February, and I will ask that the attention of himself and of his officials be given to these works, and that he will at least proceed with those which have already been begun. The most important work on my list is the opening of the harbour at Aspey bay. That is in a section of the country where there is no available harbour at present. There is what is called a harbour, but the water is not deep enough. It is a magnificent fishing place in a good agricultural section of the country, which is within easy reach of the large markets at Sydney, North Sydney and Sydney Mines; and if the people could only get in touch with the steamer which passes their doors every day but cannot go in, it would be a great benefit to them. For the last 30 years there has been an agitation for the opening of this harbour. This could be accomplished simply by cutting through the bar, which would enable the steamer to go to a splendid harbour inside, 6 miles long and a mile and a half wide. At low water there is at present sometimes not more than 6 feet, and it is impossible for steamers to go in. Last year I prevailed on the late Minister of Public Works to put $50,000 in the estimates to make a start on this work; everything was in readiness for the calling of tenders, and I was told that tenders were called; but I was afterwards informed that some slight changes in the plans were necessary before the work could be put under contract, I find that this work has been dropped altogether from the present estimates. If nothing else were done in my county, I would ask the hon. minister to give some consideration to that work, as it is of the most vital importance to that section of the country. His officials will tell him that ft is supported by all the influences which both 89	.
sides of politics in the county could bring to bear; every public body in the county has sent petitions for it, which are on file in the department. Therefore, I hope that when the supplementary estimates are brought down something will be provided for that work. Even if I had to sacrifice every dollar for other public works in the county, I would be to a certain extent pleased if- provision were made for the opening of that harbour.


John Howard Sinclair: I wish to draw the attention of the minister to a few very necessary public works in my county, in the hope that he will provide for them when he makes up the supplementary estimates. The first is the extension of the breakwater at Charlos' Cove. The breakwater there has been partly built, but it is not long enough to be a proper shelter for boats as it stands at present. It requires to be extended about 150 feet or more. A considerable sum of money has been spent upon it, and it is a very important work in that locality. Another work is the dredging of the Tittle at Canso. This is a narrow channel connecting Chedabuc-to Bay with Canso harbour. It makes a short cut for the fishermen in stormy weather, but it requires some dredging. Orders were given, I understand, last year that this should be done, but owing to the confusion connected with the election and the difficulty of finding any one to undertake the work, it was not carried out. It would only require a very small expenditure. Then, there is an application for the dredging of St. Mary's river, which my hon. friend will find on the files of the department. This is a very important river, as it the only means of communication with the sea for a large district. It is a lumber district, and the logs are floated down the river and are sawn at Sherbrooke; but the river is not deep enough to enable steamers to come up. Some dredging has been done in the river in the last few years, and there is urgent need that it should be continued. Also the breakwater at Lower Half Island Cove on Che-dabucto bay is another important work. The dredging of Guysborough harbour is another. There is a bar at the mouth of the harbour, and it is filling up to same extent, and something will have to be done to make the harbour suitable foT the purpose of navigation. My hon. friend will remember that the branch railway that was to be built in that county was struck off, in the slaughter which was made in the estimates, and unless we can get these harbours dredged so as to afford some communication with the sea, it will be very difficult for our people to carry on their business at all. There should also be a small appropriation for cutting a channel at Port Shoreham to



enable the fishermen to get shelter. A few hundred dollars would be sufficient for that. If the minister will examine the applications for these works which he will find on his files and deal with them when he brings down the supplementary estimates, I shall be very much obliged.


George William Kyte: I desire to call the attention of the minister to some works which are similarly situated in the county I represent. For the breakwater at Little Anse, provision was made at the last session of parliament, and tenders were called for, and the contract awarded during the month of September last. I would like to call the attention of the minister to that item particularly as the timber has been purchased by the contractor, and I hope he will not lose sight of it when he comes to prepare the supplementary estimates, There were also provided for breakwaters at Port Richmond and Charlos Forest Cove, a wharf at Louisdale and a wharf at For-chu. Tenders were called last year for the construction of these works, 'but I am in formed that contracts have not been entered into up to the present time.
These works are all equally important and I would urge on the hon. minister that he should give attention to them in his supplementary estimates. There are repairs to breakwater at Petit die Grat which are urgently required. This is an important public work which was built years ago, but it is to-day in such a condition as to make the expenditure of public money on it absolutely necessary. The same remark applies to the wharf at Poulamond, which is in very bad condition indeed, and for which an appropriation of $1,600 was voted last session. The objection which the hon. minister raised in connection with the public work asked for by the hon. member for Antigonish (Mr. Chisholm), namely, that he refused to recommend a clerk of works, does not apply in this instance. A clerk of works was appointed a year ago, and I trust that these repairs will be made at the earliest possible opportunity. If the hon. minister will look at the estimates voted in the beginning of the session, he will observe that amounts were appropriated for other public works in my county which I shall not now enumerate, tout I would a.sk that he would give some attention to these in his supplementary estimates, so that the people living in these localities may reasonably expect that in the not distant future these very necessary works will be constructed. I desire to impress upon him the fact that these expenditures are asked for solely because they are absolutely required and because the works in question are very important. If he will refer to the reports of nis district engineer, he will learn, that he has testified to the urgency Mr. SINCLAIR.
and necessity of these works being carried out.
Mi* CLARK (North Bruce). I hope that lion, gentlemen opposite do not imagine for a moment that they have a monopoly of grievances against the Minister of Public Works and the government generally with regard to public works in the various constituencies. I hope they do not imagine . that items have been struck from the estimates of the Public Works. Department merely because the counties interested happen to have returned members supporting the opposition. Hon. gentlemen on this side, myself among the number, have grievances of a similar .nature against the minister and the government. I do not think we are making complaints; but if hon. gentlemen opposite are going to file their orders for items in the -supplementary estimates, then hon. gentlemen on this side should do the same. We have had the hon. gentlemen rising and filing their claims in this public way on the Minister of Public Works and insisting that he shall place these claims in the supple-men-t-aries; and if he is going to do that for his opponents, I insist that he should also do it for his friends.


George William Kyte: I shall be very glad to think that he draws no distinction between his friends and his opponents in the matter of appropriations for public works. -


David Henderson: It is rather a new departure to find hon. gentlemen opposite taking that line. I wonder if my hon. friend remembers how the Minister of Public Works in the late government (Mr. Pugsley) acted when he met with demands for public works from those who were not in sympathy with him in his public policy. I remember when he was quite ready to give a public building to a county adjoining mine in a place not very important and where the population was small, but -absolutely refused to spend a dollar in th-e adjoining constituency.


William Pugsley: What about Aylmer?


Mr HENDERSON.: That is not in the county of Halton. I am speaking for my own county, and I remember well the ground the -hon. gentleman took m the last Session of parliament when he refused any explanation in the county I represent. I then told him that the people of my county were not beggars, that the Liberal party was not going to remain in power for all time, and that we were willing to wait. I did not know that I was such a good prophet, but we did wait and I hope that my representations will have a little more effect on the present Minister of Public Works than they had on the previous one. At any rate it will not be my fault if I ' do not succeed. I was pleased to hear the

hon. gentleman who spoke before me saying that he wanted the government to give their attention to both sides indiscriminately, but that is a new policy for the Liberal party.


Mr. CHISIIOLM (Inverness).: I wish to say a few words to press on the Minister of Public Works the claims of the county I represent. I think it is the duty of hon. members to place before the government the requirements of their various counties, and in my opinion any one who fails to do so is not performing, as he should, his duty to his constituency. I do not think that anybody in this House has .a right to hold his tongue in such matters. I perhaps have been doing a little too much of that during the last two or three years, and I now propose, when I have something to submit to the government, to urge it openly in committee. I may say that I have implicit faith in the desire of the hon. minister to treat every county properly; and now that he is preparing his supplementaries, I have some suggestions to submit to him with regard to requirements in my county which no doubt will receive fair treatment. There are several works in the county of Inverness which I would like to see provided for, if possible, in the supple-mentaries. They were all provided for in the supplementaries of last year. I wish briefly to enumerate these works. I shall take first the work at Tory Harbour. That is an artificial harbour, which was provided for in the supplementaries of last year. It is an important harbour, intended to afford shelter for perhaps some 40 or 50 fishing boats. There are some forty or fifty families depending on the fishing industry here. If the hon minister will look over the reports of his engineer, he will see that the expenditure on this harbour is one which the engineer declares absolutely necessary and urgently called for. Then there is Long Point wharf. That wharf was built five or six years ago, but is now practically of no use as it is almost covered with sand, and it. is necessary to extend it out some 200 feet if it is to be of any benefit to the people. I need not enumerate the various reasons why these works should be attended to, as the hon. member for North Cape Breton (Mr. McKenzie) has gone over that ground already and the same conditions) obtain in my county as in his. Then there is Crignish where a wharf is urgently needed. The lumber has already been bought for this work, and I am sure, from what the hon. minister has told us, he will see that the necessary amount will be provided in the supplementary estimates to carry on this work.
I now come to Mabou Harbour which is another important work, as the hon. minister will see if he looks up the engineer's report. It is the only harbour in that part of the county, which is very 89 A
prosperous and has large exports, and where this channel protection and dredging is urgently required. At Finlay Point, there is another wharf which is now practically of no use. That wharf requires to be extended some 200 feet, as the minister will see by the report in his department. Then there is Margaree Harbour where a sheer dam is required, and I would lay particular stress on the importance of this work, because that is the only harbour in the stretch of country some 40 miles in extent with a population of some 17,000 or 18,000 people. $10,000 was appropriated last year for the purpose of I'uilding a sheer dam there.
The minister will see, by reference to the report of the engineer, the importance of this work, and will understand that it should be continued as soon as possible. Then, there is a little harbour, the Friar's Head harbour, which is for fishing boats. It was partly built four or five years ago. The amount necessary to finish this harbour is not large, and I am sure that when the hon. minister knows the number of fishermen there, he will see the importance of completing it. There are over 50 fishermen depending on this harbour for boat protection. Then we come to Cheticamp Point. When I tell the minister that from this point over two hundred fishermen go out to the fishing grounds, and that a settlement of something like three hundred families depend for a living here on the fishing industry, which is (depending upon the shelter of this breakwater, he will see the importance of it. I might spend half an hour enumerating the various necessities for this work, but it is not necessary, as the hon. minister has the report of the engineer before him. There is a work at Pleasant Bay, also, an extension of the wharf that is there now. The wharf is of no use unless extended by building another breakwater to the northeast. There is a thriving settlement here of over 40 families who depend on fishing for a livelihood and this wharf is the only protection the fishermen have. Then we come to Marble Mountain. The minister has a report on this work and he will see thereby the importance of this work also._ I simply place the demands of the county before the minister that he may provide for them in the supplementary estimates. I have always found the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Monk), courteous, and I hope he will see his way to grant our reasonable demands. AM these 'grants are contained in last year's estimates.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I am glad to hear suggestions; but I corroborate what has been said by hon. members on this side, that it is a great mistake to imagine that claims and complaints come only from the otheT side.
I have had quite a number of complaints

on this side of the House. I may say we have a heavy budget, I suppose $30,000,000 when all is considered, but four or five hundreds of millions would not suffice to build all the public works asked for of the department. The hon. gentleman must not forget that during all the years we were in opposition we got very little from the government. I was fifteen years a member of the House and never got a single public work, except on one occasion, when I asked the Minister of Public Works of that time for a small w'harf. He said he would give the wharf, provided I would not speak about it in the House. I do not say that that is the right way to obtain public works, but you might try' it.


John Howard Sinclair: I was struck with the faith of my hon. friend behind me {Mr. Win. idhishotan) who .said that he had no idea that counties would be discriminated . against that were represented by opponents of the government. In reply to what has been .said by my hon. friend from Halton (Mr. Henderson) and the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Monk), I might say that the experience of which they spoke was that of my own county during eighteen years of Conservative rule, with the exception of four years when the county was represented by a Conservative. During those four years a few public works were built along the coast. It was not that the requirements of the county were not brought before the government, because Mr. John A. Kirk and Mr. D. C. Fraser, .who represented the .county, urged the government year after year to do some-about the .coast of that county. But during fourteen years, the name of the county, or any place in the county, does not appear, I venture to say, in the estimates. On one occasion a Minister of Public Works came to the shire town of any county and told the people in plain language that the only v-ay for them to get appropriations for the county was to vote Tory-[DOT] support the government and you will get something.' That was the doctrine. I hope we have improved since then. I could give many instances to show that under the late government that did not prevail. For example, the late government was asked to do .something for the construction of branch lines in eastern Nova Scotia. They looked over the ground and found a hundred and fifty miles of that country without a railway. Half was in the county of Halifax, represented at that time bv the leader of the present government and Mr. Crosby, two Conservatives, and the other half was in Guysborough, represented by myself. They laid down two branches .of railway one for each county and put. about . $1,000,000 for each in the estimates. And what did the present government do? When they came into power they struck the pen through the ap-


Frederick Debartzch Monk: propriation for Guysborough and left^ the appropriation for the county of Halifax. That leads me to fear that my hon. friend behind me has too much laith in the present administration, and also that the hope expressed by my hon. friend from Inverness (Mr. Chisholm) may not be realized. But you cannot starve or drive the people of Guysborough into supporting the Tory party.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.


John Howard Sinclair: You may try it, but you cannot do it. During fourteen years when Hie Conservatives ruled before, it wras tried and it did not work and it will not work now. I .should like to feel that this was not_ going to be the policy of the present administration. But, apparently it is to'be their policy. They are doing the same in the case of officials, cutting off heads everywhere in order to give jobs to their friends. They are even cancelling mail contracts, taking advantage of a clause in each contract which enables them to cancel. We know that the prices will go up for the carrying of mails. Owing to the greater expense of living, the higher price of horses, &c., it is certain that when they let the mail contracts they will have to pay for them. But they are cancelling these contracts merely to give them to their friends.


John Allister Currie: Did the hon. member (Mr. Sinclair) really take seriously the votes for his county in the estimates last year, made on the eve of an election? Did the hon. gentleman really think that the government were going to spend that million dollars in his riding?


John Howard Sinclair: I don't think there is any necessity to answer a question like that. My hon. friend knows very well that the late government always took these matters seriously. They not only put items in the estimates, but they spent them. If the present government will carry out the policy of' the late government, it will be the best thing they can do for themselves and for the country.


David Henderson: I would Lke to ask the hon. gentleman how his county fared during the regime of the Liberal party?


John Howard Sinclair: Fairly well.


David Henderson: Well, tell us all about it. My impression is that the hon. gentleman has got so much that there is scarcely any room for any thing more. Where would he put any more public works in his comity after fifteen years expenditure by the government he was supporting?


John Howard Sinclair: The hon. gent'eman is quite right, the late government treated

my county much better than ever it was treated before. But the great requirement in my constituency for its development was a branch railway, and it was a great disappointment to the people when the present government was returned to power, because they felt that this important worn that had been started by the late government might be stopped, and that fear has been realized.


John Allister Currie: It is a well-known fact that this branch railway in the hon. gentleman's riding always appeared during the regime of the Liberal party just on the eve of an election, and it has never been built yet. I am sure that if the Liberal party were in office again, every time an election came round there would be an item in the estimates for this railway down in Guysborough. The hon. gentleman should have grafted the plum tree with the plums on it, he should have had that railway built before there was any chance of an election.


John Howard Sinclair: The hon. gentleman knows as well as I do that the question of branch lines was only decided on last year, and there was no time lost after the government committed themselves to the policy of building branch lines to the Intercolonial. Immediately on that announcement being made, the supplementary estimates were brought down with a million dollars for Guysborough county, and engineers were placed at once on the work to get ready for construction. There was not a day lost by the 'late government in regard to that matter. The statement of my hon. friend that this road has been used by the Liberal party for election purposes I absolutely deny. The people in my constituency have been endeavouring for many years to get the government committed to this work before they were finally successful. The contracts that were made with the different companies were not made at the time of an election, but between elections. Hon. gentlemen opposite had better not talk too much about election promises. Let me remind them that their leader, w'hen he went out west last summer promised the people everything that was in sight, promised to give them back their natural resources, to give them back their mines, their lands; and coming down to the head of Lake Superior, he promised terminal elevators at the public expense, promised chilled meat refrigerators out in the west when there appeared to be no public demand for them. I need not go over them all. On the very eve of the local election in Prince Edward Island he sent a telegram down to the Conservative party in Prince Edward Island, saying that he was going to build a car ferry across the strait,
and to widen the gauge of the road, in order to help them to win the local elections. Why, Sir, on the eve of the election he issued a manifesto to the fishermen of the maritime provinces promising that he would give them free medicine. There was nothing he could think of that he did not promise in order to get votes. There was never anything known like it in the history of Canada. Hon. gentleman had better not talk coo much about pre-election promises.


Mr. DAVIDSON.: I am a little surprised at hearing the hon. member for Guysborough (Mr. Sinclair) complain that estimates brought down by the late government previous to the elections have not been renewed. As a matter of fact it is known to every person in the province of Nova Scotia that, during the last fifteen years, public works have always been dangled before the constituencies just on the eve of an election. -The hon. member for Richmond (Mr. Kyte) made a similar complaint a little while ago. He knows very well that his county has always been promised some great public work just previous to an election, and after the election was over no more was heard of it. The federal government and the provinoial government, in 1904, started to build a bridge across the Lennox Passage, a necessary work, just previous to the election, but after the election nothing more was heard of it. I was surprised to hear the hon. member for Guysborough assert that the branch line in his county had not been used for election purposes by the late government. As a matter of fact, the hon. gentleman from Guysborough, owes his election on more than one occasion, to promises to 'build this very road. The hon. gentleman himself was a member of a provincial legislature for some years, which, just previous to the general elections, made a declaration that this road was going to be built; 1 went through his county in 1905 and I found that men were actually at wOTk with wheelbarrows, building that road. As a matter of fact, it has only been used as a kite to amuse and attract the people of his constituency. Everybody in his constituency, everybody in Nova Scotia, knew that when this branch line was proposed, it was only as a vote catcher, and that as soon as the Liberal government were returned, nothing more would be heard of it for another five years. But new we have a business government in power, and something will be done. I think the policy pursued by the hon. gentleman, his bickerings and objectionable language, would, in my judgment, deter any government from taking any interest in his constituency.


George William Kyte: As the hon. gentleman has spoken of my constituency, it is only fair
2811 '

that I should not take his observation with silence. The statement that he made in respect to public works in the county of Richmond only being commenced on the eve of' an election is absolutely untrue

Some lion MEMBERS. Order, order.


George William Kyte: I profess to have more knowledge of the facts.
Some lion. MEMBERS. Order, order.


George William Kyte: I am quite willing to withdraw the statement and say that the hon. member for Annapolis is not as familiar with the conditions in that county as I am.


Avard Longley Davidson: I know something about the Lennox passage bridge.


George William Kyte: The Lennox passage bridge was an incident merely between the provincial government and the municipal council. The municipal council of Richmond passed a resolution in 1903 by which they undertook to contribute $25,000 towards a bridge across Lennox passage if the provincial government would spend $25,000 as well. The provincial government accepted that proposition and made all reasonable speed in the preparations for the construction of that bridge. After the work had been commenced the municipal council met and rescinded their resolution. When they did that the local government felt that they were absolved from carrying out their part of the undertaking and the work lapsed. So much for my hon. friend's story. The hon. gentleman has been drawing a distinction between the conduct of the Liberal government and the Conservative party in the matter of public works. I remember that in 1891, upon the eve of an election, the then Minister of Public Works in the Conservative government, went into the county of Guysborough and, speaking in the shire town, told them in plain language that unless Guysborough returned a Conservative to the House of Commons, there would he no public money spent in that constituency.
With respect to public works in my county, 1 would say to you, Mr. Chairman, that the late Mackenzie government, in 1877, const meted a breakwater in the district of L'Ardoise at a cost of $30,000. In the course of time repairs were needed upon that breakwater, but the county was represented by a Liberal and the Con-* servative government absolutely refused to spend one dollar for repairing the breakwater much less to expend money upon new public works. The consequence was that in the course of years continued storms so destroyed the breakwater that instjead of it being a protection to the Mr. KYTE.
fishermen it became a menace to them and it was not until the breakwater had been absolutely destroyed that an appropriation was finally made to renew it and it cost the late Liberal government twice as much to rebuild that breakwater as it would have cost if the late Conservative government had spent a reasonable amount each year in maintaining it. The hon. member for Annapolis is perhaps not conversant 'with these facts, and I would suggest to him that before he undertakes to discuss matters in my county again he should inform himself of the facts and not take up the time of the House in making observations that are not consistent with the actual facts as they exist.


Avard Longley Davidson: The hon. gentleman claims that I am net conversant with the facts on which I pretend to speak. These facts I am conversant with and I propose to make them known to this committee: In the year 1905, two weeks before an election, work was begun upon the Lennox passage bridge. My hon. friend, who now represents the county of Richmond, came to Ottawa some time previously. He was paid a fat sum by the municipal council of Richmond for the purpose and it was supposed that he came to get the assistance of the federal government in the undertaking. He went back to Richmond and made it appear to the electorate there that the federal and local governments were assisting the municipal council in the construction of this bridge. Work was begun on this bridge tvm weeks before the election, two days after the election it was discontinued and nothing- has been done'since. There are the plain, unvarnished facts.


George William Kyte: I state that the resume of alleged facts indulged in by my hon. friend is not in accordance with the actual conditions. What election took place in the county of Richmond in 1905?


Avard Longley Davidson: Well, it was in 1904.


George William Kyte: Then my hon. friend is not as familiar with these things as he professes to be. There was no election in 1905 and I repeat again that the work was not continued because the municipal council met in the meantime and passed a resolution withdrawing the offer which they had made towards the construction of that bridge. No federal assistance was promised then or at any other time. The people of Richmond are quite competent to deal with all these matters without any assistance from the hon. gentleman.


John Howard Sinclair: Mr. Chairman, I wish you would permit me to answer what the hon. member for Annapolis (Mr. Davidson) said in regard to the commencement of the construction of a railway line in my con-

stituency for political purposes. His statement is not in accordance with the facts. I took the opportunity on one other occasion to explain this matter, and I think my hon. friend knows what the facts are. He is repeating an old story about wheelbarrows that some one told him and from which he seems to have got an incorrect impression. I would like to tell the committee that this company that was using the wheelbarrows on this road was composed of his own political associates, his own friends, and for their own purposes. A company was formed to build a line of railway in my constituency and one of its principal members was Mr. Fitzpatrick, a Conservative local member in Nova Scotia. Associated with him were my late friend Mr. George McCormick of Parry Sound, Ontario, and Mr. McLeod who, I think, represented North Ontario in this House. Three leading Conservatives of this country were associated with one or two other gentlemen and formed the company that was organized for the building of this line of railway. They got two years in which to commence the work and about the time that the two years' period was expiring they asked an extension from the local government of Nova Scotia. The local government at that time were not inclined to give that extension, but the contract contained a clause that if they commenced work on the line before the expiration of two years it would hold the contract until they could float the company and secure the capital. That is the explanation. Failing to get the consent of the local government these gentlemen, consisting of the leading Conservatives in this country, started with their wheelbarrows to build a short piece of the railway. They built about half a mile of the railway and Conservatives have since that time thrown that up to the Liberal party as if the Liberal party had something to do with it. It was done without the consent of the local government of Nova Scotia, or of the Liberal party, and it was done by a company consisting of leading Conservatives for the purpose of holding their contract and for no other purpose. When the hon. gentleman comes here and misrepresents questions of this kind in the House and tries to make members of this House believe that that piece of road was built for political purposes by the Liberal party he is going very far astray and I do not think that I should remain in my seat without endeavouring to put a few of those wheelbarrows right down his throat.
Manitoba-harbours, rivers and bridges- general repairs and improvements, $10,000.


William D. Staples: I would ask the minister to send an engineer to inquire into an expenditure at St. Lorette on Lake Manitoba. The expenditure was made by the late government for political purposes, but it has been left in such a condition that after spending $15,000 of the people's money it is of absolutely no value.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Do I understand that my hon. friend is asking that we should repair all the errors of the 'late government? An ocean of money would be insufficient for such a task. Within the limits mentioned, we will be glad to see if something cannot be done to remedy the state of affairs he has mentioned.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend from Macdonald (Mr. Staples) is claiming that while the work is a useful public work more money ought to have been expended on it. The information was reported to me that the work was completed so far as the public needs require. The request now made is a reasonable one that the minister should send an engineer to 'look into the matter and I hope he will look into it carefully, and not spend more money than is needed. That is the conclusion we came to from the reports of our engineers.


William D. Staples: When the ex-minister says it was completed, he is not stating what is consistent wdth the facts.


William Pugsley: That is quite parliamentary.


William D. Staples: It was thrown up there for political purposes in 1904, and the day before the election the men engaged went off for a jollification, they went to the polls and voted, and there has not been a dollar spent on that work since, although in every session I brought it to the attention of the ex-minister.


William Pugsley: The report of the engineer was very clear that that work was completed so far as wras in the public interest.


William D. Staples: That is information I could not get out of the ex-minister all the time he was in office.


William Pugsley: Why is the item for the Winnipeg beach breakwater dropped? That was advertised for; tenders were received and the contract was let. Has that important work been completed?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I do not think any contract was completed for that work, or it would have been provided for in these estimates.


William Pugsley: I think a contract was given to Messrs. Dunn, of Winnipeg.
Athabaska river, removing boulders and deepening channel through sand and gravel bars, $12,000.


Frank Oliver: What part of the Athabaska river is it intended to improve?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: At Grand Rapids, amongst other smaller rapids. The work was started in 1911-12, blasting rock in an endeavour to improve navigation. The amount of rock blasted it is impossible to estimate as much of the work was done through the ice, and the measurement could not be taken. River pilots claim great improvements in the rapids this spring, buit a large number of rocks still need to be removed.


Frank Oliver: The amount asked for the coming year is somewhat less than for the .current year. I want to impress the importance of the improvement of the Athabasca river and the amount of good that may be done by a moderate expenditure for that whole northern country. The whole country that constitutes the basin of the Mackenzie river, 1,500 miles from north to south, by about 500 from east to west, nearly one sixth the total area of Canada, is available to the navigation of this river and its tributaries. River , navigation is reached at Athabasca Landing by a branch of the Canadian Northern now about completed. There is then river navigation from that point to the Arctic ocean with the exception of the rapids of which my friend has spoken, and another serious rapid at Fort Smith. It would be impossible to improve the Tapid at Fort Smith, but the Grand and a succession of rapids below are quite capable of improvement to such a degree as to permit navigation by loaded scows down stream very freely.
My criticism would be that the amount asked by the minister is small for the purpose, and that a moderate expenditure there would be of immense benefit in developing that northern country. Until these recent improvements were made at Grand Rapids, all scows going down the river had to be unloaded and the goods had to be portaged from the head to the foot of the rapids, the scows being taken down light through the rapids or brought out of the wafer and carried on a tramway. By the improvement already made it is possible to run the loaded scows through the rapids, without portaging, but there still remains a great deal to be done to make it reasonably safe.
It is now possible, but it is not safe, and a reasonable further expenditure would make the rapid, while not absolutely safe, so improved that there would be no extra charge on the goods by reason of their being taken over the Grand Rapids, whereas at present the extra charge amounts to something like 50 cents per hundred pounds. Below the Grand Rapids is a succession of rapids extending to Fort McMurray. In a distance of about 80 miles there are six or eight rapids, each one of which requires some improvement to make it safe for the


Frank Oliver: passage of scows. Scows do run down now without discharging except at the Big Cascade. In low water they have to discharge part of their cargo, which adds greatly to the cost of freight and the risk of navigation. I am informed that it is practical to improve both the Big and the Little Cascades, so that the scows can run through full at low water. I would urge the minister to make additional provision in the supplementary estimates to carry on the work which has already been begun.
The reason why it is more desirable now to push these improvements than it was before, is because, rail communication having been established with the navigation of the river, the great impediment that formerly existed to the transport of heavy machinery and supplies is done away with. Until the railway was built to the Landing all goods had to be transported by wagon or sleigh, and only comparatively small pieces could be taken; but now the largest and heaviest machinery can be taken. A great deal of money is being invested in the attempt to develop petroleum wells on the Athabasca below these rapids, a very large quantity of machinery was taken down last summer, and there is no doubt a great deal more will go down in future years, particularly if a successful strike is made. The expenditure already made has been of great advantage, but I would urge- the hon. minister to increase the amount so that substantial work can be done that will afford an open channel for loaded scows down these rapids, so that they can carry the heaviest machinery necessary for the development 'of the mines and the wells without unloading at the rapids and without danger of destruction.
Edmonton-wharf, $10,000.


Frank Oliver: I see that this is a revote of a similar amount which was in the estimates of last year. May I ask what the prospects are of translating the promise into performance?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It is intended to carry out this work, which was asked for by my hon. friend. Plans have been prepared, and we will jiroceed as soon as these estimates are passed.
Dredging-Miaritime Provinces, $500,000.


William Pugsley: Has my hon. friend outlined his division of money yet?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Not yet. As my hon. friend will see, there has been considerable reduction in the amounts appropriated for dredging generally from last year, but I think it will be necessary to restore a large proportion of these in the supplementaries. Perhaps I shall be able to give" some details when we come to them.


William Pugsley: The same remark will apply to Ontario and Quebec?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Yes.
Grand river bridge at York, Ontario, repairs, painting, &e.>
$500.


William Pugsley: This is a provincial bridge, entirely within the province, why should we repair it?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: This is a bridge that was built by the federal government years ago, and we have always maintained it. These are urgent repairs.


William Pugsley: I dq not remember that my attention was ever called to that bridge. Over what river is it?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Over the Grand River. It is in York county, Ontario.


William Pugsley: When was it built?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Long before the late government came into power.


William Pugsley: Would my hon. friend get the information before we come to concurrence? He will remember a discussion in the past as to the responsibility of the different governments for building these wholly provincial bridges. My hon. friend had something to say on that question. Perhaps he would get the information before we come to concurrence?
Cape Breton-new telegraph lines, 13, $12,000.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Is it the intention to go on with these lines which have been started in the county of Inverness between Nyanza and Rossville, and also between Ferry Landing in the county of Victoria, and Peters Point in the same county? There are some other lines in Cape Breton partly under way, and I would like to know if it is the intention of the government to complete them?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It is the intention of the government to complete lines which were projected and commenced.
Improvement of repair service, province of Quebec, $3,000; new telegraph line and repairs and renewals to existing lines, $1,500.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I would like to know what are the rates charged on those telegraph lines


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I think they are the same, if not lower than the rates generally charged.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The Department of Public Works has a land line on the Magdalen Islands to connect the several islands together, and that telegraph line connects with the mainline at Meat Cove, N.S., by a cable. The islands are closed from November until April each year when there is no navigation. I urged some years ago the
establishment of a Marconi station at Birds' Rock, which would be of very great service to navigation because that is the first land sighted by the steamers when navigation opens. A Marconi station there would be a great advantage to the business interests of Montreal, Toronto and elsewhere. [DOT]
But, it seems to me that the people of the Magdalen Islands, being shut off from communication for several months each year, are entitled to low rates. I made an arrangement with the department of Public Works some years ago, under which the people of the Isiands might send a letter on the telegraph lines to Meat Cove in Cape Breton, and the operator there wouhl post the letter so telegraphed, and for this service the rate was very low-I do not recall the figure exactly. The reason for this was that the merchants of the Magdalen Isiands are very anxious to know the condition of the fish market. Commercially speaking, the Islands depend chiefly, if not wholly, on Halifax and Pictou, their business connections being mainly with those places. Does not the minister think that the low rate to which I have referred should be reinstated? The government telegraph is not a paying institution, being mainly for the use of the government itself. Surely, the government can afford to give the people on the Islands facilities for communication which are given to other parts of the Dominion. The hon. gentleman knows that some years ago we built, at considerable expense, the line from British Columbia to Yukon. The Magdalen Islands, I think, supply a larger population than that of Dawson. The last census showed a population in the Islands of about 6,000 people. They are well-to-do people, very brave and very industrious. I think they ' are abundantly entitled to the concessions I suggest.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I will make a note of the hon. gentleman's observations. I do not remember having heard, since becoming Minister of Public Works, of any complaint regarding the rates. Certainly, in that instance, the rates should be as low as possible.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Meat Cove is in the county I have the honour to represent. The telegraph extends through the county in connection with the cable that lands there.	The fishing towns
along the coast of the county are connected with the line which is an immense advantage to them. There is one exception- White Point, a fishing village which has grown up about ten miles off the course of the line. It would be a great advantage to this village to share the privileges in this respect of other towns, as it would bring them in touch with the markets of the

world. It is only a matter of extending the line nine or ten miles. White Point has about fifty or sixty fishermen, and growing all the time. The expense of construction would not he heavy considering the number of people who would be served. I have been bringing this to the notice of the department for some time and I had an understanding with them that the work should be done. But it has not been done yet. I hope the minister will direct inquiries to be made and that he will give to this village of White Point the same facilities that are given to other places.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I will call the attention of the superintendent of telegraphs to what my hon. friend has said.
Telegraph lines-Saskatchewan and Alberta -Atliabaska Banding-Peace River-landing line-extension to Grand Prairie, $3,000.


Frank Oliver: Is this amount believed to be sufficient to complete the line to Grand Prairie, and will it be completed during the coming summer?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: That is what we expect.


William Pugsley: This amount is entirely a revote.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Yes.
Construction of line from Atbabaska Landing to Fort McMurray, $21,000.


Frank Oliver: Has any work been done on this line? If so, what route is it intended to follow?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I do not think that is quite decided. But, if not, it will be decided before the supplementary estimates are put through and I can give the information to my hon. friend.


Frank Oliver: With regard to the line from Edmonton to Fort McMurray, I wish to place before the minister the alternative routes. One plan is that the line shall follow the Atbabaska river either actually or approximately, from Atbabaska Landing to Fort McMurray.
The other proposition is that the line shall follow the trail to Lac La Biche. and from there directly to Fort McMurray, and through the interior without any regard to the river. There are advantages by either route. The advantage of having the line follow the river would be that if the line were made a telephone line with telephones at different points, it would be a vast convenience to the river navigation in the summer time. An immense amount of freight necessarily follows the river in sumlmer. So if the line, followed the river it would be of great advantage during the summer navigation. In the case of oil development for which prospecting is being carried on, the telephone line along the river would also be of great advantage. On the other hand, Mr. McKenzie.
the winter trail is by way of Lac La Biche, and the line similarly would be of advantage during the winter. The Lac La Biche line would have the advantage during the winter that the river line would not have, because there is practically no travel 'by way of the river during winter. For my part, I have always held that the weight of material advantage in assisting the development of the country is in the river line, and that it should be a telephone line so that telephones could be put in at different places where there is permanent settlement on the river, and would be of advantage to the navigation of the river, and to the mineral development that is now going on.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I am not familiar with the locality, but I note what my hon. friend has said. There has been difficulty with these telegraph lines, as there has been with other branches of the service, in the preparation of the estimates. I will see that my hon. friend's observations are brought to the notice of the superintendent of construction.
For the construction of a loop extension of the telegraph line from a point near Moose to Durlingville, $3,570.


Mr. WHITE (Victoria).: Has there been any work done on that loop line? I see the revote is $3,570, and in the 1912-13 estimates it was $6,650. I would like to know if any of the money has been spent?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I think it has all been expended, the work has been progressing.


William Henry White: Last year when the late government decided to extend that line to Durlingville, the people expected it would be extended on to Cold lake. There is a large settlement at Cold lake, but there is no railway, .and no means of communication with the outside world. Coal lake would be about 100 miles from the Canadian Northern railway. It is quite a large settlement, and a telephone line would be of great advantage to the people in case of sickness, or other necessity. I understand that a telegraph line costs only about $150 a mile, and there is plenty of timber in that country for poles. I think the government might well expend that amount of money to afford telegraphic communication, until such time as a railway is built in order to bring these people into communication with the outside world. They are very anxious about it; sometimes they have to travel 100 miles on matters of business, so one can easily understand that in the winter time especially telegraphic communication would be of great advantage to them. I have received a petition from the people asking for an extension of the Atbabaska line to Lac La Biche. They are in a similar position, they are 40

miles distant from railway communication, and it is a long distance to travel. I think it would cost 'between $150 and $200 a mile to build a telegraph line to meet the needs of these people. There is no immediate prospect of a railway, and it may be two or three years before they get a railway. I would like the minister to give consideration to this matter, and try to give the people the relief they need.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: My hon. friend's request seems to be very reasonable, and I will endeavour to meet it. Perhaps my hon. friend might confer with the superintendent on that particular point, as he is much more familiar with the locality and * with what hasi been done.


William Henry White: I have conferred with the district superintendent with regard to Cold lake. He resides in Edmonton, and he thought that if application was made to the government, with proper representations, the government would possibly extend the line.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Who is the local officer?


William Henry White: Mr. Macdonald.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Has he made some report?


William Henry White: I do not know whether he has made a report. He is the man who made the estimate for the line from Moose Station to Durlingville. I took the matter up with him about the extension, and. he thought it was really needed.
MooM-ja w-Wood Mountain Telegraph Line-renewals and reconstruction, $11,900.


Frank Oliver: The hon. member for Moosejaw (Mr. Knowles) is not here, and I would ask the minister what explanation there may be with regard to this work, what has been done, and what is it intended to do?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I could not give precise information this evening, but I can get a report of what is to be done and give it to the member for Moosejaw.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Does the government put in telephone lines as well as telegraph lines?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: In some instances I think they do.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: In the part of the country I come from, the government telegraph lines are serving useful purposes. If they could be exchanged for telephone lines they would be of infinitely greater service.
Peace River-telegraph line-office building, $2,900.


Frank Oliver: Perhaps the minister would be good enough in this case, as in
regard to the Moosejaw line, to furnish a memorandum at a later date, in regard to the office buildings on the Peace River line, that is in the constituency of Edmonton. If my hon. friend will give me a memorandum showing where the buildings are to be, those Which have been completed, and what is to be done with regard to the others, I would be very glad.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I will do so.


Alexander William Chisholm: I would like to ask the minister if it is the intention of the government to grant the privilege of stringing telephone lines on telegraph poles ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I believe that has been done.


Alexander William Chisholm: What are the conditions under which it is done?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I do not think there has been any rule laid down. Sometimes the privilege has been granted to telephone companies who wish to extend their line to some other point. The matter is discussed and then some agreement is arrived at.


Alexander William Chisholm: Will the department he in favour of granting the privilege, say, to a private company of placing their lines on the government telegraph poles. I have now in view >a certain section of country supplied with telegraph lines and where I know the telephone company would be pleased if they should be permitted to put telephone lines on the telegraph poles. Of course, it is quite an expensive matter to erect telegraph poles, but if such companies could have the privilege of placing telephone lines on telegraph poles a large section of country that I have in view would be served with telephone communication.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I should think that would be reasonable. Of course, it would be a matter for discussion and arrangement, but I think that in most cases the thing might be done under conditions which would protect us against loss-.
Telegraph line from North Battleford to Isle la Crosse-loop line to Nesta, $13,000.


Frank Oliver: This is in the constituency of the hon. member for Battleford (Mr. Champagne) who does not appear to be in the House, and I am sure that he would be very glad if the minister would give the information now, or, if he cannot do it now, at some future time, as to what has been spent on this project and how far it is intended to carry it. It would seem there has been same expenditure or that it is not intended to carry out the project much further.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I have not the information under my hand. I think some work has been done, but if the hon. member for Battleford requires the information I can give it to him.
Mr. PUG8T.EY. Would not my hon. friend have a note of it? There will have been an expenditure of $26,000 by the 31st March. There must have been a great deal of work done.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: There has been a great deal of work done but I have no note of the information.


Frank Oliver: If my hon. friend would take a note of it and have a memorandum prepared by the officers of the department and let the hon. member for Battleford know, I am sure it would be satisfactory.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I will see that he gets it.
Monument to the memory of the late Hon. George Brown, $10,000.
Monument to the memory of the late Hon. Thomas D'Arcy McGee, $10,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Has the hon. gentleman located the site upon which the statue to Thos. D'Arcy McGee is to be erected? I see that there is at Ottawa quite a quarrel about the statue to D'Arcy McGee. I read in the papers the other day a protest against the suggested intention of the government to place the statue on the Plaza in front of the post office. The correspondent stated that the Plaza was a site which should be kept for the statue of the late King Edward. Has my hon. friend made up his mind where that statue is going to be placed?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No, I have not, I confess, given the matter a thought since the last time it was mentioned en passant, in the House. I believe it was to have found its place on the Plaza, wherever that is, but nothing has been determined whatever. The statue is not finished. I have no doubt a suitable place will be found for all our great men without exception when we get their statues ready.
Monument to the memory of the late Sir L. H. Lafontaine, and the late Hon. Robert Baldwin, $17,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What about the site of the Lafontaine-Baldwin statue? Has that been decided?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Not that I am aware of.


Rodolphe Lemieux: This is a monumental statue.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I must confess that I have not given much attention to these statues. I have been so busy with wharfs and breakwaters. I thought that these were mostly under contract.


Frank Oliver: 


Rodolphe Lemieux: Yes, I saw the other day the statues of McGee and George Brown in Montreal. But, I am speaking about the sites. This Lafontaine-Baldwin statue is a very considerable monument, and I thought that perhaps my hon. friend had made up his mind about the site.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No, that remains still undecided.
Monument to Madeleine de Vercheres, to be erected at Vercheres, $25,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: This statue to Madeleine de Vercheres is, I suppose, carrying out the idea suggested by the late Governor General, Lord Grey to the L'aurier government. I am very glad that the present government has thought it proper to include an amount for the erection of this monument. It is a splendid idea.
Last summer an incident took place at Vercheres, which I might perhaps recall to the memory of the minister. The government of the day, and especially the Postmaster General were taken to task because, forsooth, the Postmaster General did not furnish to the postmasters of Quebec signs for their post offices in the French language. The Postmaster General is not obliged to furnish signs in paper or in enamel, or in wood to any of the postmasters, yet there was great excitement in the province of Quebec, the Postmaster General was a very bad man indeed, he was a traitor to his language because he did not furnish to the postmasters of Quebec signs in French to distribute all over the post offices. But a very ingenious priest from Vercheres, who was more engaged in politics than in the duties of his office, began writing letters and making an agitation against the Postmaster General. He had a sign artistically painted and sent his bill to my department for payment of same. He was very patriotic, but at the expense of the country. He wanted the Postmaster General to pay $25 or $30 for that sign, and when I refused him very courteously, stating that the Post Office Department did not provide signs to the 15,000 post offices in the country, he immediately started an agitation, and one day he gathered the school boys and the young girls from the convent, lie organized a procession, and there and then installed the sign ' Bureau de Poste ' on the post office. It was a triumph for the French language in the village of Vercheres, and of course . the Postmaster General was roundly abused by that lover of the French language. I am glad to see, in view of the abuse that was heaped upon the late government by the Rev. Father Baillarge, that the reverend gentleman will have within his parish a splendid statue of Madeleine de Vercheres, the great
[DOT]2825

heroine of New France. This, js the answer of the Laurier government to the Nationalist agitation of the Rev. Father Baillarge.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: This is all very interesting, but it is perhaps not quite relevant to the vote under discussion. We are very greatly indebted to Lord Grey for the idea of having a statue erected to Madeleine de Vercheres, not perhaps known throughout the country, but a very heroic character indeed, in our early history of New France. The work has been entrusted to one of our artists. It has not yet been completed, but I have seen the model, and although I do not claim to be a very good judge in matters of art, it will be, I think, an admirable statue, and everybody will feel grateful to all those who had a part in securing this commemoration when it will be erected in the old histdHcal place of Vercbhres which was the theatre of her indomitable courage and womanly perseverance.


William Pugsley: I want to have a hand in this, I think I am entitled to a very considerable amount of credit in connection with this monument.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Hear, hear.


William Pugsley: It was I who had the honour to submit to my colleagues the proposal that we should erect a monument on the Vercheres bluff in memory of this young lady, whose name stands out in history as one of the most courageous of Canadian women. It gave me very great pleasure to ask my colleagues for the very handsome sum of $15,000 for the purpose of erecting this monument.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Hear, near.


William Pugsley: It gave me great pleasure to direct the officials of my _ department to enter into a contract with Mr. Philippe Hebert for the doing of the work, and 1 desire to bear testimony to the good judgment which my hon. friend has shown in putting that amount in the estimates for the' purpose of completing the good v, ork which we began.
National Art Gallery, Ottawa, $35,000.


Frank Oliver: I was always curious about this item even when I was a member of the government. As a member of the government, I was forbidden to ask too many questions, hut now I am relieved of the .responsibility, I am going to ask what is done with this sum, and who does it.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I think it is a most praiseworthy effort whoever started it, of giving us some beginnings of an art gallery here at the National Capital. An advisory board was organized by the late government; composed at present of Sir Byron Edmund Walker, Dr. Shepherd, of Montreal,
a man of a great deal of taste in artistic matters, and the Hon. Mr. Boyer. These gentlemen give their time and a great deal of care and attention to the expenditure of this small sum of $35,000 which we vote each year, for the purpose of purchasing paintings and objects of art, as much as possible, from our own Canadian artists. In the last volume of the department's report my hon. friend will find a list of the purchases, which have been made so far. These paintings and works of art, are installed in the Victoria Museum in this city. Some time before we came into office, Sir Byron Edmund Walker and his colleagues secured the services of a curator on trial. Mr. Eric Brown has been found by the advisory board to he a competent man, and I expect in the supplementary estimates to ask the House for an additional sum to provide for a larger expenditure next year on these works of art, and a more complete installation in the Royal Victoria Museum. It is a very modest beginning, but the men who are acting on our advisory board, give it. a great deal of time and attention without any remuneration and we are doing our best in a very small way, as my hon. friend may see, to do something towards establishing art in this country, developing artistic tastes and encouraging our young artists. The amounts expended for the purchase of works of art are small, varying from $500 to $1,500. I have not had time since I have been in office, to visit the gallery, but I am told it is well worthy of inspection, and certainly I hope the House will encourage this movement in a very proper direction.


Mr. BENNETT (East Simcoe).: When is the gallery to be opened?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It is expected that it will be inaugurated in March or April. A couple of days ago I saw Sir Edmund Walker, who is taking a great deal of pains to have a suitable catalogue prepared and in other ways. We expect to have a rather good opening in the early spring. We hope to have the presence of their Royal Highnesses and to draw the attention of the public to the efforts we are making to establish an art gallery.


William D. Staples: Is it the intention to have all Canadian artists of note represented in that gallery?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It is, I understand from the Advisory Board, the intention to encourage as niuch as possible, our own artists. I only saw one painting in the list that was not the production of a Canadian artist, that was one by Sir Joshua Reynolds, for which $3,000 or $4,000 was paid -and it must have been a bargain at that price.


William D. Staples: Then I desire to call the attention of the minister to a Canadian artist, of the name of Mrs. Hamilton, whose family happens to come from my constituency. She had an exhibit at Wilson's here a couple of weeks ago. Her paintings have been on exhibition in Paris, and she has been recognized there and all through Europe. She has also been recognized in Canada to the extent that the Duchess of Connaught has purchased several of her paintings. Therefore, I think that this government should see that her work is represented in the National Gallery, and also somewhere in these buildings. There is no doubt about her ability and the splendid work she has done. I ask the minister to investigate her work and give her the place to which she is entitled as a Canadian artist.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I certainly will do so. I am glad my hon. friend has called my attention to her work, and I will bring his observations to the attention of the Advisory Board.


John Allister Currie: Will the minister tell us who the Advisory Board are?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Sir Edmund Walker, president of the Canadian Bank of Commerce; Dr. Shepherd of Montreal, who is quite an authority on matters of art, and the Hon. Senator Boyer.
Construction of water storage dams and regulation works on the upper Ottawa river and tributaries, $200,000.


William Pugsley: Will my hon. friend inform the committee how this will be expended?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: For the continuation of the works already undertaken-the Timiska-ming darn, the Quinze dam and the Kip-awa dam.


William Pugsley: What is the condition of the work on the Timiskaming dam?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: The department is continuing the work by day labour under careful supervision.


William Pugsley: The reason I ask the question is this. I have noticed in some of the Conservative newspapers reports of information supposed to have been given to them by the commission which this government has appointed-I refer to the commission of which Mr. Morine is the chairman, and the other members of which are Mi. Lake and Mr. Ducharme; a commission which is sometimes spoken of as an impartial commission, consisting of two defeated Conservative candidates, and the president of * Le Devoir,' a strong partisan newspaper. Now, I object very strongly to this commission giving out partial information with regard to any Mr. MONK.
matter they are investigating, until all the evidence has been heard, and all the facts can be submitted to the public. I have read what purports to be a statement which they must have given out to the _ Conservative press in which these allegations are made; That, in the first place, the work was let without tender; that it was changed to a concrete dam; that no tenders were called for the concrete work; that afterwards the contract was again changed and the contractors received great favours. One might infer from these statements that the contractors were still going on with the work and were to receive the sum of $350,000. Now, I can imagine nothing more unfair than for these one-sided statements to go to the public. I have no objection whatever to all the facts connected with any public work with which I as Minister had anything to do, being made public; but what I do object to is that a commission shall give to a section of the press, to the newspapers supporting the government, a one-sided story, and not all the facts of the case. With regard to the Timiskaming dam, the facts are simply these. Tenders were called some years ago for a dam to be built partly of timber and partly of concrete. After "the tenders were received it was decided. to make a change in the plans and construct the dam entirely of concrete. Members of the committee know that during the last few years there has been a great change in the views of engineers as to the desirability of constructing works of this character as far as possible wholly of concrete. Concrete is rapidly taking the place of timber in the construction of dams as well as many other works. So far from the contractors not being the lowest tender on concrete, they were the lowest. The tenders were called on the unit plan, so much per cubic foot for timber work, and so much per cubic foot for concrete work. They happened to be the lowest tenderers as the matter was figured out by the engineers of the department. When it was decided to change the work and make it wholly of concrete, the work was given to the contractors, who were the lowest on concrete work as well as on the dam as originally planned.
It is not from newspaper reports supposed to be given out by the commissioners that I am speaking. Not one step was taken except upon the report of the responsible engineers of the department. My hon. friend the Minister of Public Works has very properly born testimony himself to the very great experience, good judgment and the devotion to the public interest of these gentlemen. Not a step -was taken by me in connection with the Timiskaming dam except upon the report of the responsible engineers of the department. When

it was suggested to make the work entirely of concrete, the contract was given to the lowest tenderers and they proceeded with the work. I believe a change was made in the site of the dam. Hon. gentlemen know that there is no more difficult work coming within the purview of engineers than subaqueous work, as it is difficult to ascertain with accuracy the nature of the soil under water. A slight change was made in the location, with the result tnat there was a vast deal more unwatering to be done than had been figured up by the engineers. After that was brought to the attei tion of the engineers and myself as minister it was decided that, under all the circumstances, it would be reasonable to allow the contractors the actual cost of unwatering, doing it on the force system- that is adding 15 per cent to the actual cost and paying that to the contractors. Subsequently there was an unprecedented pressure owing to the spring freshets and the coffer dam, which the contractors had built, at great expense, was carried away. That gave rise to a dispute between the contractors and the department. The contractors contended that by reason of the change of site, they had encountered quicksand and there were enormous difficulties which they had not anticipated. The matter was gone into fully by the engineers. On more than one occasion Mr. Coutlee, who has charge of the work, was sent to make a careful examination, and the result of his inquiry was that the engineers recommended it would be better for the department to release the contractors, to take the work out of their hands, and proceed to complete it by day labour; and it was agreed that the contractors should be paid exactly what they had expended on the work-not one dollar more. They were not to be allowed any profits but simply their actual outlay, the amount to be determined by the experts of the department. That was done, the department proceeded by daywork, and the government of the day has carried out that plan. That is the whole story with respect to the Timiska-ming dam. Yet these commissioners have allowed to go out to the public the impression that some great fraud has been committed on the public by the contractors with the connivance of the department. I thought it my duty to state the facts, and I took occasion some time ago to move for the papers, and I shall be glad if any hon. member will take the trouble to go through the papers, which will verify every word I have said. This matter gave me great anxiety. I was careful to take no step except after the most careful examination by the engineers of the department, in whose judgment, integrity and regard for the public interest I had the greatest confidence after four years experience; and
my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works, after his experience of four months in the work they are carrying on, has the same confidence in these gentlemen which my four years experience taught me to place in them. I wish to repeat that I took no step of any kind or description in the matter, and gave no order except upon their recommendation.


Rodolphe Lemieux: If my non. friend the ex-Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley) expects any justice from these hon. gentlemen he will be sadly disappointed. _ As regards the personnel of the commission, I know very well our late colleague Mr. Lake. I know that he was a very bitter partisan when he sat in this House, but he is certainly a gentleman. As regards Mr. Morine, I know nothing about him except that he was a defeated Conservative candidate twice, I think, in the maritime provinces. But I happen to know Mr. Dueharme by reputation. He is a citizen of Montreal, and one of the bitterest opponents of the late government that one could find in that city and district. He is president of the company, which publishes ' Le Devoir,' the organ of the Minister of Public Works. He is also president of the company which publishes ' Le Nationalists,' a Sunday paper, which has been condemned, I do not know how many times, by our courts for libel, not only against private citizens but against the judiciary. Two of the editors of that paper were sent to jail for their gross^ libels against the judiciary of the province of Quebec. While Mr. Dueharme of course found at all times the means of avoiding costs and responsibility, we know that he is the financial backer of those who are publishing that sheet, If I were to be investigated officially as head of a department by Mr. Dueharme, I would strongly object for many reasons which my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works knows very well. Mr. Dueharme, besides being strongly biased politically, has had a very notorious career in Montreal. My hon. friend knows that for a few weeks he was president of La Banque Provinciale and was forced to resign because the shareholders would not have him any longer as president, and he has ceased to be a member of the board of directors.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Was he a defaulter, and what reasons does the hon. gentleman assign for making these very serious charges that will go out to the public against this gentleman who is not here to defend himself?


Rodolphe Lemieux: I shall bring shortly before the House the facts in connection with that case. Mr. Dueharme was obliged to resign as president of La Banque Provin-

dale, a position he occupied for a few weeks only.
He was also secretary of the municipality of Ste. Cunegonde, a suburb of Montreal, for some years. People know what has been his success in that capacity. I say he has a very notorious reputation [DOT]in Montreal, and the country surrounding Montreal; and I would certainly refuse to be investigated by Mr. Ducharme. I think he rather needs investigating himself than to be engaged in investigating others. I repeat to the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley), that he cannot expect justice from Mr. Ducharme. He is there as a party man to render services to liis party, to do the muckraking work and nothing else.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He is likely to find plenty of muck to go into.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Perhaps, if he could go into any hon. friend's (Mr. Bennett) constituency, he might find lots of muck.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He will find lots of it in that riding in the acts of friends of the late government.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The hon. gentleman has only to denounce them and bring them to the bar of the House, or if they are in this House to name them. I am not afraid to tell Mr. Ducharme that I would refuse to be judged by him, for he has been judged by the citizens of Montreal, by the shareholders of La Banque Provincial and by the people of Ste. Cunegonde, who know what he is.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Nobody will find fault with the ex-Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley) for claiming that his own administration of the department was a proper one. But I am surprised to hear a man of his experience attribute to members of the commission reports published in the papers, which I am perfectly sure could not have emanated from any of these commissioners. How these things get into the papers we do not know.


William Pugsley: That report which I saw, stated that this was information which the commissioners had discovered.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It cannot be. Nor is there ground, very often, unfortunately, for the statements ' made by newspapers. It is quite conceivable that newspapermen may have had access to the .report of the Auditor General, which report if I am not mistaken, went at length into this Timis-kaming dam matter. I remember, long before this government came into power, correspondence given at some length, with comments of the Auditor General, in the report of the officer in regard to these contracts and the way the works were carried on. There alone, so fax as I know, the newspapermen could have found informa-Mr. LEMIEUX.
tion. I do not think my hon. friend has any justification for the aspersions he has cast upon this commission. The commission is composed of honourable men of high position, chosen amongst many by the government, not for the purpose of discovering anything against ex-ministers, but to endeavour to place all our departments upon -a proper footing and to make suggestions which would enable the government to improve many branches of the public service that are now defective. I take the responsibility as a member of the government, of having insisted that the appointment of this icommission was necessary fox that purpose, and I asked particularly that it should enlighten me with suggestions for the best administration of mv own department, a most important one. Was there no room for improvement? Will my hon. friend, or will any man -who has looked into the system, say that our dredging as it has been carried' on, is not susceptible of improvement ? - without thereby reflecting on any officer of the department or anybody else. Short though the time is during which I have had charge of the department, it has been long enough for me to learn that not only in the branch ocf dredging, but in other branches as well, improvements are possible and desirable. I have great hopes that when these men, who have leisure, who have business ability, have looked through my own department, they will be able to make most useful suggestions.
My hon friend (Mr. Lemieux) finds fault with the nomination of Mr. Ducharme. I very much regret this. Not that I feel it necessary to defend Mr. Ducharme in any way, 1 can assure the committee of that, his name not being as well known outside of my native province as it is there. I took the responsibility of suggesting his name as a man who has worked his way up in life and bears an honourable name where he is known. A man of wide means, a capitalist and a man of great business ability, I felt that if our province was represented on that commission-which I thought advisable-it should be properly represented by a not only able, but honest man, one holding a high financial position as a man of business. I am confident that, if his health- he is a man. of weak health-enables him to remain there, he will amply fulfil the expectations I have foimed. The hon. member for Rouville says that he is a director of - a newspaper, ' Le Devoir.' Why, I am interested myself in that newspaper. A number of us in Mont- eal have contributed, as far as we could, each according to his own limited means-Mr. Ducharme more than myself, because he has more means-towards the foundation of a newspaper, utterly, absolutely inde-

pendent, not under the control of anybody but its editor. That newspaper has rendered service in cur municipal elections. It is not, so far as I know, affiliated with any party.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Except the Tory party.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: The hon. gentleman is very much mistaken. He must see evidence of absence of such affiliation in the paper every day I think the ex-Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley) is mistaken in the view lie has taken of the commission. It is not a muck-raking commission, though it may, in its investigations, find out things that are not commendable. The prime object of its creation was to look through the departments and find out what improvements could be brought about. We have had several commissions which have produced good results. There was one of which Mr. Fyshe was president. Another was that of Judge Cassells. And I am convinced that the present commission also will produce good results. I think it would be better for the ex-Minister of Public Works not to anticipate what the conclusion will be. These' commissioners are not charged with a partisan investigation. - They are going to look into the administrative lepartments, and I do not see what reason there is to find fault with them beforehand.


William Pugsley: What I saw in the papers did not profess to be what was contained in the Auditor General's Report. I have no objection to every word s^3Jed in that report being published.
What this professed t-o state was certain discoveries which this commission had made; it professed to be information coming directly from the commission.
What I object to is that partial information, one-sided information, half the truth mixed with considerable falsehood, should go to the public as being the true facts of the case. The public naturally look to a commission, particularly that portion of the public which does not know the partisan character of this commission, for the true facts in the case.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Has my hon. friend any
evidence that these statements were made by the commissioners to newspaper men, because I am sure they were not.


William Pugsley: I simply judge from what I saw in reputable Conservative newspapers, which gave the impression that these were discoveries which the commissioners had made. Now I do not complain, notwithstanding the character of these commissioners, of a full and complete investigation of the department while I had the honour to preside over it, and I suppose 90
my hon. friend would not complain of a full investigation of the department while he presides over it. But would not my hon. friend expect to be treated fairly in such an investigation; would he not expect a full and complete investigation, before any factsi should be given to the public with respect to any particular case? No one reading what I saw in the newspapers purporting to come from these commissioners, would imagine for a moment that this work, under the circumstances I have indicated, was taken off the hands of the contractors on the recommendation of the engineers of the department. Their reports are all on file, but you would not imagine from reading this newspaper report that these commissioners had been able to find a single report of the engineers.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Would' it not be better to let that item stand until there is a larger attendance of members of the committee?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I have waited patiently to get the remaining estimates for my department through, and I expect to be extremely busy next week with preparing the sup-plementaries.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The hon. Minister of Public Works must not expect to escape criticism as to the character of the commission he has appointed. He says he expects to put his department on a better working foundation, and to establish a better system of bookkeeping in the department, inside and outside. If that is to be brought about, it cannot be brought about by novices who know nothing about that business. If there is to be an improvement in dredging, for instance, we want a man who has some knowledge of mechanics, who has some knowledge of building and operating dredges, engines and machinery generally. I submit that there is no qualification along any of those lines in the gentlemen of this commission. Mr. Morine and another gentleman who was at one time a member of this House, have no qualifications along those lines. Mr. Morine is a very estimable lawyer, a very clever lawyer, and if the Minister of Public Works wanted anything along the line of the profession of that gentleman, it would be well done. But when he asks him, who is only a lawyer, to take in hand the establishment of a new system of bookkeeping for instance, he is taking a man who does not know the first thing about doubles entry bookkeeping, a man who could not close a system of books to save his life.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I would suggest to my hon. friend that there will be an item in the supplementary estimates for the expenses of this commission, and perhaps it would be better to defer criticism until then.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I have nothing to say against these gentlemen along their own lines. But when he asks us to provide money to pay this commission, we would expect them to be men with a reputation in the direction of the purpose for which he has appointed them.


William Pugsley: The Minister of Public Works has mentioned to-night what he has said before during the session, that he expects these men to give him some idea how to improve the dredging system now in vogue. Is my hon. friend serious in that? Are there more than two ways in in which you can do dredging, one by contract by the cubic yard by scow measurement, the other by cubic yard in situ? Will the hon. gentleman suggest any other way except those two ways in which to make improvement?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I would ask my hon. friend not to insist upon such an explanation at this moment. He has mentioned a measurement in place and a scow measurement. Without going further than that, does he think that the scow measurement that has prevailed in the past on our dredging contracts, instead of the place measurement, has been productive of good results? Does he advocate a continuance of the system of scow measurement as it exists to-day? I would ask the hon. gentleman not to enter upon that chapter this evening, because the hour is late. When the expenses of this commission come up at a later day, we will have an estimate for dredging in the supplementaries, and I will be prepared to go fully into that question, and to prove to the hon. gentleman that there are advantageous changes to be made in our dredging system.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Where are the commissioners sitting at present?


Mr MONK.: I believe they are sitting in the Canada Life Building at the present moment. They have merely begun their labours, I do not think they have investigated any branch fully.
Mr. LEMIEUX Will their central office be in Montreal or Ottawa?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: In Ottawa.
Mr. LEMIEUX I ask, because I have seen Mr. Ducharme lobbying in the House, and I thought he had an office in this building.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I suppose a man may come up to the parliament building for other purposes than lobbying.


William Pugsley: Why does my hon. friend think that Mr. Morine, a lawyer formerly of Newfoundland, and latterly of Toronto, could give him any assistance in


Frederick Debartzch Monk: dredging? Does he think that Mr. Lake, a gentleman who came out from England, and engaged in farming at Qu'Appelle, in Saskatchewan, could give him any assistance in dredging? Does he think Mr. Ducharme-


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Surely my hon. friend is joking.


William Pugsley: Surely it is the engineers of the department who can tell my hon. friend best how to let these contracts for dredging. Of course, when contractors are guilty of fraud and inspectors lie in with them and try to defraud the government that is something that has to be carefully watched. But, my hon. friend does not require Mr. Morine, or Mr. Lake, or Mr. Ducharme to tell him that. My hon. friend knows that he has to employ honest officials and honest engineers. There are only two ways in which you can give out dredging work, one being to measure in the scow, and the other to measure in situ. It depends upon circumstances as to which is the better way to let the work. In some places, like canals, you can better let it by the contents in situ. In harbours, where you cannot get at the quantity very well in situ, you must let it by the quantity as per scow measurement. If my hon. friend will be good enough to bring down the papers relating to the Timiskaming dam before the supplementary estimates are brought down it will answer all my purposes.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Yes, they will be brought down at once. I cannot allow to go unchallenged what my hon. friend has said as to whether a lawyer is a proper judge of dredging. Of course a commission of that kind has the power of hearing not only engineers of experience but men who are absolutely conversant with the dredging business. Had this commission not been constituted I intended inviting to an examination of this branch of my department the well known firm of Price, Waterhouse & Co. who have looked into these transactions, and have an immense experience of them. It is not the fact that Mr. Morine is a lawyer, or Mr. Lake, a former English civil engineer, and now a farmer, or Mr. Ducharme, a financial agent, that impairs in any way their judgment when they have conducted their investigation in a proper way and looked into these transactions. But, we will have this matter up for discussion again.
Quebec harbour-improvements ait mouth of River St. Charles estuary-to complete contract, $66,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Would my hon. friend explain that item?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: These are the large wharfs that are being built at present, Mr. Dus-sault has the contract.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Is it not for damming the St. Lawrence?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No, it is for building the large piers in the estuary of the river.
Quebec harbour-River St. Charles-improvements to navigation, $500,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What is that for?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: This is a revote. We have not decided exactly the character of these improvements. The matter will be taken up as soon as parliament has adopted the estimates. I think the plan which consists in providing a dam and lock at that point is the one which seems to commend itself most to the people of Quebec. It is at present under the consideration of the engineer. Nothing has been determined.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Is it the intention of the government to have some of the large ports declared to be national ports? I know it was a very eloquent theme of my hon. friend when he was on this side of the House. I thought that as his estimates were eoming up he would refresh his memory by the report of the commission which was appointed and which was presided over by Mr. Reford. The conclusions of that report were that a bold and aggressive policy should be adopted by the government, that national ports should be declared and associated with that recommendation was the suggestion that such ports as St. John, Halifax, Montreal and Quebec should be declared to be free ports. I think I went so far as to suggest that Gaspe be a national port, but at all events my hon. friend was very sanguine about it, and on several occasions in the House he advocated that as being a sound policy. Would my hon; friend say now, or later on, whether he is going to take a decision this year or wait until another year about declaring national ports?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: My hon. friend recalls a position which I took and which I maintain to the present day. I think that the report to which my hon. friend has alluded is the ablest report we have had on the transportation question since the matter has been under study in this country. The conclusions were admirable. National ports were recommended on the Atlantic, the Pacific, and the Great Lakes and these ports really exist at the present time. They do not require my weak voice to proclaim them national ports. They are national ports. They require our attention and 1 think my hon. friend sees in these estimates some evidence that they are receiving ^ recognition. We are approaching a realization of the dreams that I dreamed when in opposition.


Rodolphe Lemieux: But my hon. friend does not say which are free national ports.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Paris was not built in a day.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I know that; nor Rome.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Does calling a port a national port mean that it shall be a free port?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I think it ought to mean that, but it is not yet accomplished.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: A national port is a good sounding name and we have lots of excellent ports on the Atlantic. I would like to know the rule by which the government decides that a certain port is a national port.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: There is no strict meaning, we have used that expression since the report, of Mr. Reford and his colleagues, because in that report they recommend that certain of our ports be declared national and free ports and treated as such, national in this sense that the country shall undertake all the necessary expenditure to equip them. There were I think 11, Vancouver, Victoria, Prince Rupert, the Great Lake ports, Depot Harbour, Midland, Montreal, Quebec, St. John and Halifax. They were to be not only national ports but free ports as much as possible. My hon. friend knows that Antwerp and Liverpool and Bristol are national in that sense but they are not absolutely free ports. The commission was of the opinion that they should be made absolutely free. Whether we will be able to realize that or not I cannot say.


Rodolphe Lemieux: For the present the hon. gentleman is simply following the footsteps of his predecessor. He has not initiated any new policy.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Oh yes<.


Rodolphe Lemieux: In what respect?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: 
William Pugsley: My bon. friend was rather taking credit for doing something that we had not done, claiming that the government were making a new departure. Let us see how. He speaks of national ports at Port Arthur and Fort William. We appropriated for thes/e ports last year $1,050,000 while my hon. friend is this year asking only $1,000,000.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Wait till you see our supple-mentaries.


William Pugsley: Then take Quebec harbour, we asked $625,000 and there is only $500,000 this year, and all of that is a revote.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: You did nothing.


William Pugsley: Yes we spent $625,000 last year.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Does he say that some real improvements were carried out in Quebec on any fixed plan?


William Pugsley: Yes, we built a pier, 1,450 feet long, right along the shore of the St. Lawrence, where we have 40 feet of water, large enough to accommodate steamers bigger than any now on the Atlantic. We built a ' T ' for that wharf, and we were making improvements inside on the St Charles' river, doing a lot of dredging and giving very great additional accommodation. My hon. friend is simply carrying out improvements started by the late government. The only increase of any consequence, is in the cases of Victoria and Vancouver, where he is putting in $500,000. We were doing this out of the dredging vote, but he is treating them as national harbours, and changing the amounts to capital account instead of paying them out of consolidated revenue.


Rodolphe Lemieux: My hon. friend forgets that in the race for business, the harbour of Montreal defeated her great rival New York during several seasons.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: In what business?


Rodolphe Lemieux: In ihe grain trade and butter and cheese.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: The figures would be edifying.


Rodolphe Lemieux: It is due to the excellent adminstration of the harbour of Montreal by the three commissioners, who, fortunately, were not under the thumb of the Minister of Public Works.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I must take exception to that statement. These men are friends of mine, and I would not like that statement to go abroad.


William Pugsley: He said they were not under your thumb.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: And I never pretended they were.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: 


Rodolphe Lemieux: They are under the direction of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and it -is due to their ability and efforts that the harbour of Montreal has been made such a great success. When my hon. friend said that our harbours are not equipped, surely he does not speak for Montreal.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Does the hon. gentleman say Montreal is properly equipped now?


Rodolphe Lemieux: As far as circumstances allow it is as well equipped as any other port in the world. Of course we are proceeding now to spend a large amount. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries is introducing legislation to lend more money to the Harbour Commissioners- of Montreal, I expect that within a short time the harbour of Montreal will be unexcelled on the continent of America. So far it has been so well administered and equipped, that we have been able in two or three years, in succession, to beat the record of New York.
Some resolutions reported.
Mr. MONK moved the adjournment of the House.


William Pugsley: What business will be taken up on Monday?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: The Grain Bill and the other government Bills, and then Supply.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 12.43 a.m., Saturday.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, February 12, 1912.