1913-05-31

THE PUBLIC ARCHIVES.

[Stage Direction]
Rt. Hon. R. L. BORDEN (Prime Minister) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 240, to amend the Public Archives Act. He said:	This Bill proposes a very slight
amendment to chapter 4 of the statutes of 1912. It provides that:
Unless otherwise ordered by the Governor in Council, the powers and duties of the minister under this Act shall not be exercised or discharged by deputy except so far as the Dominion Archivist is authorized to act for or as the deputy of the minister.
It has been suggested that the archives should 'be created into a separate department, inasmuch as there is some difficulty in carrying on the business of the archives owing to the fact that its location is altogether separate from the Department of the Secretary of State, who is the minister of the department. This does not seem necessary; but at the same time it should be placed in such a position that the Archivist can, with the assistance of an accountant or other suitable officer, carry on the business of the archives with a much less

amount of red tape as to very small transactions than has been necessary in the past.
Mr. LEMIEUX:: Will Dr. Doughty become a deputy minister under this Bill?


Mr. BORDEN:: He was accorded the rank and status of a deputy minister last year; but, as the archives was not created into a department, it has been necessary, every time the officers have required a small amount of stationery, a bottle of ink, or any trifling article of that kind, to make a requisition and get in touch with the Department of the Secretary of State. If they have desired to send out $50 or $100 to any of the men who are constantly employed in doing work for the archives in various parts of the country, there has been a good deal of delay and inconvenience. I am quite convinced that the arrangement now proposed will he attended with considerable advantage in the administration of all matters connected with the archives.


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

Robert Laird Borden: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I think it only fitting that reference should be made to the untimely decease of one of our colleagues, who has been a member of this House for more than twenty-two years. I refer to Mr. Brown, the late member for Chateauguay. I am sure that all of us, irrespective of party, will join in conveying to the family and friends of the deceased our deep sympathy and our appreciation of his worth as a member of this House. It was not my privilege to know Mr. Brown very intimately, but I do know that he was highly respected on 'both sides of the House; that he was a man who gave very devoted and constant attention to his duties as a .member; and I am sure that his death is a loss not only to hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House, whose colleague more especially he was, but to the House as a whole. On 'behalf of the members on this side of the House, I beg to tender to hon. gentlemen on the other side as well as to the family and friends of the deceased, our very deep and appreciative sympathy on this occasion.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: I am grateful to my right hon. friend for the very kind words he has just spoken regarding the decease of our lamented friend and colleague, Mr. Brown. As my right ,hon. friend has stated, Mr. Brown was a highly respected member of this House. Although he did not take a very great part in our discussions, it was my privilege to know him for many years and to appreciate the soundness of his judgment, the integrity of his character, the firmness of his disposition, and the cordiality of his relations with his
friends and neighbours. He represented the county of Chateauguay, which contains a mixed population of Scottish and French descent, and he represented it to the satisfaction of all races. He was a man of broad sympathies, who could reach all races and creeds without giving offence to any whilst firmly maintaining his convictions. His departure from this life, as my hon. friend has said, will be a severe loss to his friends. I sincerely appreciate the kindness of the remarks my right hon. friend has offered, especially with regard to Mr. Brown's family, and it will be my privilege to convey to them the observations which have been made by the Prime Minister with regard to our late lamented friend and colleague.



RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.

Wilfrid Laurier: With regard to the railway subsidy resolutions, I asked my hon. friend the Minister of Railways yesterday for the correspondence he has on the subject. My hon. friend would simplify and expediate matters if he would bring down the correspondence and with everything concerned with the applications lay it on the table to-day.


Mr. COCHRANE:: In reference to the
Canadian Northern, there is no correspondence.


Wilfrid Laurier: There is no
correspondence?


Francis Cochrane: No. An application
was made verbally or personally, and it was worked out by the auditor of the company and the auditor of the department. That has all been done personally.


Robert Laird Borden: There are of course statements as to the financial position of the road, as to the amount of capital invested, the amount which has been raised, and matters of that kind. Would the right hon. gentleman like to have some of these statements in advance?


Wilfrid Laurier: No. If there is no correspondence, I cannot ask for what does not exist. We shall have more information when we take up these resolutions in committee on Monday.


Francis Cochrane: The correspondence
with reference to the others will be laid on the table to-day.


Mr. OLIVER:: There are some questions asking for information in regard to the Canadian Northern. As it might be possible for my hon. friend to overlook these questions, I suggest that as they are important, he be prepared to answer them on Monday.


Francis Cochrane: I can answer them all but one. In fact, I have the answers here

now. The one exception is in reference to the guarantees and subsidies; we have not got them all. Many of the lines are branch lines and having charters from the provinces, and subsidized by the provinces, by guarantee or otherwise. We have no record of them, and I was going to ask that that question be changed into a notice of motion for a return.


Mr. SPEAKER:: This is hardly the time to discuss these questions.



CONVEYANCE OF LETTER CARRIERS.

[Stage Direction]
On the order for the second reading of Bill No. 120, respecting the Conveyance of Letter Carriers on Electric Railways:
Mr. PELLETIER:: This Bill being controversial, and likely to take up some time, and everybody having an earnest and sincere desire for prorogation as soon as possible, I will ask the House to allow me to drop this Bill for this session. One of the purposes for which it was introduced has been attained. I do not dike to use harsh words, but we had difficulty in coming to an agreement with an important tramway company as to the conveyance of our letter carriers. They wanted a price which was out of the way, and we thought it was in the public interest to introduce legislation so that we could control that, as we control everything we ask the railway companies to do for us. I am happy to say, however, that we have made a temporary arrangement with the company which, though it cost almost double, will enable us to wait until next session, as legislation will not be needed for some ten or eleven months. I only desire the House to understand the situation. Our letter carriers have been transported over the electric tramways in Canada for a long time. When the arrangement was started, the letter carriers found this to be a great convenience to them. The arrangement did not necessitate any increase in the number of cars, and the companies consented to give the service for a very low price. Little by little they increased the price, until we have now reached this situation, that the tramway company which for some years got $8,000 asked this year $20,000. That created a situation which had to be met. Fortunately, as I say, we have made this temporary arrangement.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What is the price agreed upon?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: We have come to the conclusion to give $15,000, instead of $20,000, which they asked.


Rodolphe Lemieux: That is for Montreal?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: For Montreal.


Rodolphe Lemieux: In Toronto, how much?
Mr. COCHRANE,


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: I have succeeded in
coming to a very satisfactory arrangement with the Toronto company, who met the Post Office Department in a very reasonable way. Last week we signed an agreement with the company in Toronto for four years at the rate of $12,000 a year. Toronto has three hundred and fifty-five letter carriers and special delivery messengers, and, as the number is likely to increase, we are going to gain as the second, third, and fourth years come along. That figure, $12,000 a year or $1,000 per month, represents a little over $34 per head. In Montreal we have three hundred and eight letter carriers, for whom we are paying $50 per head. That is the price we are obliged to pay-I am using the words advisedly. We have been obliged to make that arrangement, otherwise our letter -carriers would have had to walk, and that is impossible in these days. But that arrangement is for only a year. I am prepared to enter into any arrangement wdth all the companies in Canada at the reasonable rate agreed upon between the Toronto company and the department.
. Mr. LEMIEUX:	What do we pay in
Quebec?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: $42.50 per man.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What is the number of letter carriers there?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: The total number is
sixty-five. We have another grievance, which we have not settled so far, with regard to Ottawa. Whilst we pay the prices I have just indicated in Toronto, Montreal, and Quebec, we pay in Ottawa the enormous price of $75 per head, and, though I have tried my best, I have not been able to induce the Ottawa company to do as the others have done.


Rodolphe Lemieux: How many carriers are there in Ottawa?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: Eighty-seven. Comparing these prices the House will see how unreasonable some of these companies are. I do not want to go too far at the moment, but I hope that those people will realize that they should give us as good an agreement as the one we have with Toronto, without legislation being necessary. I hope that before next session we shall be able to agree, for I would prefer not to reintroduce this Bill if we can agree. I would have preferred not to have presented the Bill if we could have agreed. The railway and -tramways companies had a kind of understanding, which is now gone because Toronto and Quebec have agreed that they should not stand by it. The understanding was that they should ask -sixty dollars per -head. Toronto has now consented to this, and I hope that I shall be able to settle all the

other questions. Under these circumstances, I ask leave to withdraw the Bill.


Mr. PROULX:: How is it that Toronto
has more letter carriers than Montreal, a very much larger city?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: The revenue of Toronto is much higher than that of Montreal. It is very much larger than that of any other city in Canada.


Mr. CARROLL:: Is there any arrangement at present with tramway companies in the maritime provinces?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: We have not much diffculty there. There is one point in the West-I do not like to mention it-where we have some difficulty, as we also have in Ottawa.


Wilfrid Laurier: If you mention Ottawa, why do you not mention the other recalcitrant?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: I have no objection
to mention it. It is the same company practically as the Ottawa company.


Mr. NICKLE:: May I ask the Postmaster General if the opinion of the law department is that it is within the jurisdiction of this Parliament to pass an Act that would compel a provincial corporation to carry letter carriers at a rate to. be fixed by the Postmaster General?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: This point came up, and before introducing this legislation I consulted the Department of Justice about it, because I had some doubts myself. The Department of Justice sent me an official answer telling me that there was no doubt that we had the right.


Rodolphe Lemieux: One of the last Bills
of my own administration as Postmaster General was similar to this. We had a Bill passed to give our inspectors and assistant inspectors the right to travel on the trains of any provincial -or federal railway company on the business of the department, and the Department of Justice agreed that it was within our jurisdiction.


Frank Oliver: Has the Postmaster General had the advice of the Department of Justice in regard to jurisdiction over municipally owned electric railways?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: My question did not
go that far. It was about tramway companies having provincial charters. I do not think I asked about municipally-owned tramways.


Wilfrid Laurier: Would there be any difference?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: I do not think there would be.


Wilfrid Laurier: I cannot see any difference.


Edmond Proulx: The Ottawa company
has a Dominion charter, if I am not mistaken.


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: The Ottawa company has, I think, a Dominion charter.
Bill withdrawn.



PRISONS AND REFORMATORIES ACT AMENDMENT.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 236, to amend the Prisons and Reformatories Act-Mr. Doherty-read the second time, considered in committee, read the third time, and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 237, respecting the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada, and the Toronto Harbour Commissioners-Mr. Cochrane-read the second time, considered in committee, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
Harbours and Rivers, Nova Scotia-Bay St.
Lawrence-excavation of channel, $4,000.	'
['I really think you are\nentitled to that.\nProgress reported.\nOn motion of Mr. Rogers, House adjourned at 11.42 p.m.', 'Monday, June 2, 1913.']
Mr. McKENZIE:: This work, commenced five or six years ago, is an earnest endeavour to connect the small harbour with the sea, in order to make a boat harbour for fishermen in that part of the county of Victoria. So far the work has not been very successful. Two piers were built extending out at each side, but the minister will have to extend those piers further to keep the stones and gravel from filling in the bottom of the harbour. I think it 'will be necessary to extend the piers.


Mr. ROGERS:: The recommendation of
the engineer is for excavation and some extension to the piers.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The extension of the piers is highly necessary.
Beaver river wharf, $2,000.


Mr. LAW:: How many feet will this
wharf be extended, and in what direction?


Robert Rogers: The report does not give the direction; there are 18,000 cubic feet of cribwork.
Bear river wharf, $4,500.


Mr MACLEAN (Halifax):: What is the cost of the land for this wharf, and from whom was it purchased?


Robert Rogers: The property cost $1,800.
Bluff Head breakwater-repairs and extension, $3,400.


Bowman Brown Law: This is one of the most important works we have in the county. It is largely used by the fishermen, and if it



is extended it will be a- great public service. Will this vote complete the construction?


Robert Rogers: The extension will be 100 feet; the engineer reports this amount sufficient.
Boisdale wharf, $5,000.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: This work has been rendered necessary because the formeT wharf was carried away by the ice when it broke up in the spring. The wharf is near the Intercolonial railway station and it is of great public service, especially to the people from the island, who land there.
I hope the minister will see that the money shall be expended during the summer.


Robert Rogers: The proposed wharf will
be 174 feet long extended to 11 feet at low water. I think it is about the same size as the former one.


Bowman Brown Law: Will the work at Bluff Head be done by day work or by tender and contract?


Robert Rogers: Tender.
Brooklyn breakwater, $110,000.


Mr. MACLEAN (Halifax):: What is the present position of this work?


Robert Rogers: The work is under contract; the contract price is $119,500.


Mr. MACLEAN:: Who is the contractor?


Robert Rogers: The contract was with
the Nova Scotia Construction Company, and it has been transferred to Falconer & Macdonald of Halifax.
Caribou Island-raising causeway, &e., $6,400.


Mr. MACDONALD:: Does the minister
propose to spend $6,400 this year, and for what purpose? Will the work be done by contract or by day labour?


Robert Rogers: It is proposed to carry on the work by day labour owing to the difficulties in the way. It will be done this year.


William John Macdonald: What are the difficulties?


Robert Rogers: The work varies. One part is the raising of the causeway, and the other is something else, so that it would be difficult to do it by contract.


William John Macdonald: This is simply a permanent connection between the island and the mainland. Is there any defined time, or is it simply a case of putting in stone and earth in a desultory fashion, because that would be very unsatisfactory? I am anxious that this work shoulcf be done properly. The department should formulate a Mr. LAW.
plan in connection with it, and call for tenders.


Robert Rogers: The work for the present fiscal year consists in repairing and pointing the brush protection work on the seaward side; placing brush and stone and raising the lower part of the causeway to the level of twelve feet three inches above high water: During the year 1911-1912 about $1,000 was spent in placing some brush there and raising and repairing the roadway.


William John Macdonald: It is not very satisfactory to appoint a foreman and to employ men in the vicinity to haul stone and earth in a desultory way. This work has reached the stage that the department, before they expend any more money, ought to have a plan which would involve the permanent completion of the work. I want to urge upon the minister to have a work out of which the country will get full service, and which will mean the completion of proper connection between the island and the mainland.


Robert Rogers: We are taking a note of it, and will see that it is done.
Coal Harbour-wharf, $8,500.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Is this a new work?


Robert Rogers: The estimated cost is


William Findlay Maclean: Will tenders be asked for?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Comeau's Hill-breakwater repairs and extension, $3,300.


Bowman Brown Law: How much further extension will be made on Comeau's Hill breakwater? Will this extension complete the work?


Robert Rogers: One hundred feet. This extension is supposed to complete the work.


Bowman Brown Law: What is it to be built of?


Robert Rogers: Cribwork.


Bowman Brown Law: The breakwater itself is built of granite, and the piers alongside of it where the boats lie. The fishermen find some fault with it because it required woodwork on the side. Is this work to be done by contract?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Devil's island-extension of breakwater,


Robert Rogers: This is a new work. The contract is let to O. A. Ham.
East bay, north side- repairs to wharf, $2,600.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: This is a wharf on one of the arms of Bras d'Or lake. It is important because we are getting a boat to

ply between North Sydney and this place. What does the minister propose to do with this $2,600?


Robert Rogers: The approach to the wharf, which consists of brush and stonework covered with gravel, requires some replacing of the brush and stone that is broken down. The wood blocks in the approach and the head block require repairs and new fenders. The head block is in a bad condition and has been useless for many years. This is for the purpose of building an outer block. It will be done by contract.
East river-improvements. $75,000.


William John Macdonald: Early in the session I moved for plans in regard to this work. They have not been brought down yet.


Robert Rogers: I can let my hon. friend have a plan now, and shall be glad to supply a larger plan to him.


William John Macdonald: I shall be glad if the hon. minister will send me a complete plan of the work.


Robert Rogers: All right.


William John Macdonald: What information
has the department as to the time in which the work ought to be completed?


Robert Rogers: It is a pretty large work, and we have a further amount in the supplementary estimates. It will probably be completed in two years.


William John Macdonald: I call the minister's attention to the necessity of making some repairs to the boat shelter at Lismore. This shelter was constructed four or five years ago and has been of great advantage to the fishermen of that part of the country. But' it was injured by storm last year, and has been allowed to fall into bad repair. It is an absolute necessity that it should be kept in good shape. Will the minister be good enough to see that the present condition of the work be inquired into and take the responsibility of preserving it ?


Robert Rogers: The chief engineer will take a note of it.
English town-repairs and renewals to wharf, $1,100.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: This is a very important point, and these repairs are much needed. Will this work be done by day labour or will tenders be asked for ?


Robert Rogers: This is simply for repairs and renewal of certain parts and is made up of small items. I am afraid it will have to be done by day labour.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I am not afraid of it, because the minister can get good men to do the work, and I only hope that he 362i
will instruct his engineers that it should be done as soon as possible.
/
Feltzen South-breakwater in Spindler'e Cove, $10,000.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Where is the work to be located-upon the site selected two years ago ?


Robert Rogers: Yes, on the same location as originally asked for.


William Findlay Maclean: Some three years ago tenders were asked for, for the construction of this work at a certain point. The lowest tenderer was one O. H. Ham. The present Government on coming into office postponed the completion of the work for some reason, alleging as the reason the possibility of a change in location. The minister probably will not find that upon the record, but it is the fact. Now that they are reverting to the former location, would it not be fair that the contract should be awarded to the lowest tenderer of that time ?


Robert Rogers: I have no record here ol the tenders my hon. friend refers to.


William Findlay Maclean: There is no question about it. The tenders were called for in 1910 or early in 1911. The contract was not awarded, but it snould have been awarded.


Robert Rogers: I will have it looked up;
I have no record of it here.
French river, north shore-breakwater, $5,000.	'


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: What is this work for ?
I thought that was commenced last year.


Robert Rogers: It has been let by contract, and should have been completed on the 20th December, 1912.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Is it not completed ?


Robert Rogers: According to my Tecord it appears to be, but there is nothing definite to say that it is.
Gabarus harbour-'beach protection, $1,500.


William F. Carroll: What is the nature of this work ? Will it be awarded by tender ?


Robert Rogers: This is asked for by the district engineer, and is for piling and bush protection work, 1,600 feet in length needed for protection of boat harbour inside the beach.


William F. Carroll: Is this the engineer's estimate for the work ? It seems verv small.	J


Robert Rogers: Yes, this is the engineer's estimate.
Glace bay-beach protection, $2,000.


William F. Carroll: Is this to make repairs to the protection already provided there ?


Robert Rogers: Yes, it is for repairs.


William F. Carroll: Will it be done by day work or by contract ?


Robert Rogers: I think by day work.
Hantsport and Walton wharfs, $20,000.


William John Macdonald: Why are these
braoketed ? Are they close together .


Mr ROGERS:: This is simply a vote repeated from last year. I do not know the reason for putting them togetner.


William John Macdonald: What is proposed to be done ?


Robert Rogers: Build two wharfs, one at each place.


William John Macdonald: Will the work be done by tender and contract ?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Harbour au Bouche-repairs to wharf,


Mr. CHISHOLM (Antigonish):: What is to be done there ?


Robert Rogers: This is for repairs including cribwork, placing the floor stringers, &c.


William Chisholm: How much was spent there last year ?


Robert Rogers: Two hundred dollars.
Harbours, rivers and bridgw-generally repairs and improvements, $40,000.


William John Macdonald: Would the hon. minister give us a list of the items of which this amount is made up ?


Robert Rogers: This is simply for general
repairs.


Mr MACDONALD:: But could the minister mve a list of the works in contemplation on which this amount is to be spent ?


Robert Rogers: I could give some, but I have not the complete list. Church Point, Southwest 'Oov-e, Middle river, Chebong harbour, and Spray harbour. These are a few of the items that have come in so far.


Mr LAW:: Is there anything in this amount for repairs to the Sanford breakwater and the Port Maitland breakwater? These are two of the most important breakwaters in the county of Yarmouth. I hope the hon. member may be able to make these repairs out of this vote.


Mr ROGERS:: That is what this vote is for, to meet just such cases as that.


Mr McKENZIE:: The minister has
mentioned Middle river; there are quite a number of Middle rivers in Nova Scotia. There is a Middle river in my riding.
Mr. CARROLL.	[DOT][DOT]


Robert Rogers: This is for Cape Breton
North.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: What is the proposed
expenditure for?


Robert Rogers: Repairs to sheer dam,

Inverness-harbour improvements, $15,000.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The hon. member for Inverness was obliged to leave, and asked me to look after this. I understand that improvements were being made to the harbour by opening the mouth. I would like to know what stage the work is now in; will this amount finish the work, and will it be finished this year?


Robert Rogers: This item is intended to
provide for the opening of the channel, and it is expected that we will be able to complete the work this year.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Is this amount to be
used for dredging purposes?


Robert Rogers: Excavation two feet below low water mark, 9,666 yards; crib-work foT piers, 554,000 cubic feet. Dredging of channel, ten feet at low water,
25,000	yards.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Then there is some
dredging to be done this year with this money?


Robert Rogers: The dredging will be in connection with the contract.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I want to impress
upon the minister the fact that this place is on a coast which is entirely exposed to the Atlantic, and that it is only during the mildest and warmest part of the season that any dredging can be done there. In the fall or spring, it is absolutely impossible to face that shore with a dredge.
I would urge on the minister the necessity of seeing that whatever dredging he has to do there is done in the month of July or in the early part of August.


William John Macdonald: I would like to join with the hon. member for North Cape Breton -in what he has said with regard to this matter. There is a sweeping sea, with a northwesterly wind, running from Antico-sti down to Inverness, and unless the work is undertaken in the summer months, it cannot be done. It is a question of very great doubt as to whether it is worth while undertaking the work at all, unless the miinister is prepared to make a sufficiently large expenditure to build a permanent breakwater. I do not know what the plans are, but the town is a thriving coal mining town, and it would be desirable, if passible, that it should have shipping facilities by sea. Any mere trifling with the matter, or any expenditure on a small basis, and not of a peri

manent character, will be inadequate. I hope the minister will take up this matter with confidence and a determination to put it through. The conditions described by my hon. friend are so imperative that they require immediate action.


Robert Rogers: The engineer informs me that they have several reports in the department on this work, and he understands that it has been explained that it is necessary to take this work up in July.
Kelly's Cove-extension to breakwater, $7,000.


Bowman Brown Law: I am pleased to see this amount in the estimates. It is the nucleus of one of the most important fishing villages we have in this county, and considerable money has been spent there. I would like to ask the minister if this $7,500 will complete the work, and how much will be added to the length of the present breakwater?


Robert Rogers: It is already under contract.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Who has the contract?


Robert Rogers: MacNutt & Landry.
Malignant Cove-repairs to breakwater, $800.


William Chisholm: In the
estimates for 1911-12 there was an appropriation for Malignant Cove, of $2,300. That was dropped the following year, and in the supplementary estimates for this year there was an appropriation of $4,000, due to the fact that the expenditure that should have been made last year was not made, and the damage went on increasing to such an extent that a larger amount is naw required. I am not aware that anything was done last year, and I would like to know what this $800 is for.


Robert Rogers: It is for repairs to the wharf


Robert Rogers: One hundred feet. This will afford the shelter desired for the fishing fleet.


Bowman Brown Law: Will not $7,500 build more
than one hundred feet. It looks to me like a large amount for the building of only one hundred feet.


Robert Rogers: I understand that the
water is fairly deep. This is simply a revote; it has been in the estimates before, but has not been used.


Bowman Brown Law: I hope the minister intends to use it this year.


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Kraut Point-wharf, $1,500.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Is that to complete this work?


Robert Rogers: It is to complete the work begun in 1912.
Little Bra9 d'Or-construction of breakwater, $12,800.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I would remind the
minister that this is a revote; that we have been carrying this amount in the estimates for the last three or four years and that nothing has been done. It is highly desirable thait that breakwater should be built. Your department has succeeded in opening the mouth of this harbour at Little Bras d'Or, and a splendid harbour has been the result of the dredging operations carried on at that place. The engineer thought it was necessary to complete the efficiency of the harbour by building a breakwater, and I hope that the minister will see that tenders are called for the construction of the breakwater this summer


William Chisholm: The wharf has been
virtually carried away, arid it would require $4,000 to put it in shape. I do not see where the $800 would come in at all.


Robert Rogers: The engineer informs me that the $800 is for urgent repairs, and Ibe balance to replace the wharf is in the supplementary estimates.
Mushaboon wharf, $1,200.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Is that a new work?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


William Findlay Maclean: Will it be built by tender and contract?


Robert Rogers: It is a very small item; it will all depend on the engineer's recommendation.
North West Cove-(Tancook Island)-breakwater, $42,000.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Is that an
extension of the present work?


Mr. STEWART (Lunenburg):: The engineer advises that the most satisfactory arrangement would be to place the new work on the site of the old work. It would be practically a new work covering the site of the old.
Port Dufferin harbour-wharf on west side of harbour, $4,200.


Mr MACLEAN (Halifax):: Is this a new work?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


William Findlay Maclean: What will it cost?


Robert Rogers: The total cost will be

Porter's lake-boat channel to Three Fathoms harbour, $10,000.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Is this work to be done by contract?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


William Findlay Maclean: 
Robert Rogers: Not yet.
Seal Island-wharf, $1,000.


Bowman Brown Law: Will this complete the work?


Robert Rogers: No, the estimated cost of ell that will be required is $3,000.
West Pubnico-repairs to wharf, $1,400.


Bowman Brown Law: I suppose this is for ordinary repairs?	[DOT]


Robert Rogers: For ordinary repairs.


Bowman Brown Law: Considerable hand dredging
has been done there. The wharf is a long distance from the channel. A lot of business is done at West Pubnico; it is a very important place, and I would like to impress upon the minister the advisability of having one of his small dredges go there and dredge from the channel into the wharf. The hand dredging is very slow work and very expensive. If the minister had a light draught dredge which could go in there, it would be very much appreciated by the fishermen and the commercial 'community.


Robert Rogers: What is the distance
from the channel to the wharf?


Bowman Brown Law: About half a mile. With a light draught dredge I think the work could be done for a few thousand dollars, and it would be a great relief to the people there.


Robert Rogers: The trouble will be to
find a light draught dredge.
White Point breakwater, $4,000.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: We have a White
Point in the county of Victoria which needs a breakwater. Does this item refer to that place?


Robert Rogers: I am afraid this refers
to the White Point in Queens and Shelburne.


William Chisholm: I see
two items for breakwaters at Blue Rocks. There is. a Bide Rocks in Antigonish and a Blue Rocks in Lunenburg. Which is the Antigonish one?


Dugald Stewart: The first
is Lunenburg, and the second Antigonish.
Yarmouth harbour, improvements, $87,000.


Bowman Brown Law: The late Government agreed to purchase the wharf property at East Mr. ROGERS
Pubnico for the sum of $2,500. Some dredging was done there, and I would like to ask the minister if he has a memorandum of any negotiations with Henry T. D'En-tremont, owner of the wharf at East Pubnico.


Robert Rogers: I have no- memorandum, and the officers seem to have no recollection of the matter.


Bowman Brown Law: That is quite a shipping
place, and I think that if the department purchased that wharf it would be a first rate investment. They have fairly deep water there, but the owner of the wharf is not keeping it in the best of repair. There are two other points to which I wish to direct the minister's attention. First there is Pickney's Point. I wrote to the minister during the session about this place, as I had a letter from some of the residents there asking for an extension of the breakwater. There have been one or two extensions, and the increase in the number of fishing boats has been very apparent indeed. I hope the minister will keep Pickney's Point in mind, and that next session he will have something in the estimates for it. There are two other important breakwaters which have not received attention from the department this year, Short Beach and Che-goggin Point. Both breakwaters are needed by the fishermen. I trust the minister will be able next year to give this harbour and breakwater some attention and spend some money there. In reference to Yarmouth improvements, I would like to ask the minister when the work is to be done.


Robert Rogers: This amount is asked for deepening, straightening and widening the channel approach, the enlargement of the anchorage in the upper part of the harbour, improving the pier approaches and the berthing facilities at the wharfs, $85,000; also repairs and renewals to beach protection work, $2,000; total $87,000.


Bowman Brown Law: Does the minister intend to dredge the dock between the Dominion Atlantic Steamship Company's property and the Parker Eakins Company property?


Robert Rogers: 
Robert Rogers: I remember the deputation that came from Yarmouth in regard to the dredging close to the wharfs, they made a very strong case; we have the memorandum of their representations in the department and we will take it up the first day we get time to give it careful consideration with the view of trying to meet their wishes.


William Chisholm: I observe that there are six items in the main estimates for Antigonish county for trifling amounts, partly revotes, which, with the rest are to be spent on ordinary and incidental repairs. In the case of Bayfield, I find that there is an appropriation of $2,500 for * repairs to wharf and breakwater,' while in the estimates for 1911-12 of the late Government there was an appropriation of $15,000 for this harbour. I desire to know how the engineers have been able to reduce the requirements of Bayfield harbour from $15,000 to $2,500. Knowing the conditions there, the requirements of the place, and that nothing has been spent upon the harbour since the estimates for 1911-12 were passed, appropriating $15,000, an appropriation which the present Government dropped, I wish to know how they are able to get along with this small amount, particularly as I observe there is nothing in the supplementary estimates for this work. I regret that I cannot join with my hon. friend from Yarmouth in congratulating the minister upon the very generous manner in which he has treated Antigonish county in so far as his estimates are concerned. If I find, when all the supplementary estimates are down, that I have reason to change my opinion, I will make the amende honorable and render justice where justice is due.


Robert Rogers: This item is for repairs.


William Chisholm: To the wharf or breakwater?


Robert Rogers: To the wharf and breakwater.


William Chisholm: What repairs are required?


Robert Rogers: Renewal of decayed
superstructure, ereosoted crib work, covering crib work and replacing of grouting.


William Chisholm: That is for repairs to the wharf, and not the breakwater at all.


Robert Rogers: Yes, that is entirely for repairs to the wharf.
Mr. McKENZlE: I suppose the minister	is not	familiar with	the	itemsthat were contained in the estimates for 1910-11, and perhaps some years before	that. I	wish to call	his	attention	to some	of the items	that,	after
due consideration and investigation, were put into the estimates of the year 1910-11. I must make a general remark about expenditures in Nova Scotia and my part of the country. An observation was made by the hon. member for Brantford (Mr. Cockshutt) the other night which I thought was unjustified and altogether uncalled for. He made a dead set on expenditures in Nova Scotia, saying that we were having harbours here and breakwaters there, Which were not required. I speak in the presence of the officials of the department,

who are aware that these expenditures in Nova Scotia are highly necessary, and that it was improper for the hon. member to make the vicious attack he did. I am not speaking for one side or the other; whichever party is in power it is necessary these expenditures should be made. I was trying for a great many years to get a harbour at Dingwall, in Victoria county, an important place, and after a struggle of many years we had an amount put in the estimates of 1910 and 1911. I am sorry that item has been dropped. There was another item in the estimates to help the fishermen out at Meat Cove and another for a breakwater at Cape Dauphin, and another item to help another fishing village at a place called Point Acoui. For some reason or other, which I never have been able to discover, those items have been dropped from the estimates. I am sorry for that. The minister will understand that the only way we have to compete with the American fishermen, who have large vessels outsidt the three-mile limit, and who sometimes come within the three-mile limit, is to have good sized boats that they can get out from these breakwaters. If a boat is any size at all it must have shelter on that exposed coast, and if boats are so small that they can be pulled up on the beach at night, they will not stand the sea and the fishermen cannot go out in them. That is the reason why we are looking for those breakwaters and small harbours along the coast, so as to enable our fishermen to have goodsized boats. I am pleased to tell the minister that wherever we have a decent harbour our fishermen are getting good, large, gasoline boats and are able to compete with the Yankee fishermen, and go out in rough weather to share in the harvest of the sea. If the minister will look into t'he records of the department lie will find that his officers have reported in favour of these places I have mentioned. I am sorry that on the change of Government these items were dropped from the estimates, and I hope the minister will restore them and proceed with the work.


Robert Rogers: I have never had the pleasure of visiting Nova Scotia and am not familiar with the conditions to which the hon. gentleman refers, in that province, but I will undertake to remedy that this summer by paying a visit to Nova Scotia with a view to making personal inspection of the harbours and breakwaters. I can assure my hon. f'-iend I shall give every consideration to providing necessary public expenditure in Nova Scotia, so far as my recommendation will go.
Prince Edward Island^Georgetown, repairs to wharf, $1,000.


Mr. HUGHES (Kings, P.E.I.):: Will
this be done by day labour?
Mr. McKenzie.


Robert Rogers: I think it will be necessary to do it by day's labour.
Harbours and Tivers generally-Prince Edward Island, $10,000.


James Joseph Hughes: - I spoke to the minister this morning about the Government wharf at Montague, called Steven's wharf. A year or two ago there was an item in the estimates for a freight shed at this wharf, and it was dropped I suppose inadvertently. The minister will agree that a wharf is not much good without a freight shed on it. The Government wharf is the best wharf, but the steamer has to use a small private wharf because there is no freight shed on the Government wharf. Can the minister build the shed out of this vote?


Robert Rogers: It has been the practice for the Government to erect a small shed on these different wharfs. I am not quite certain whether it will be possible to take an amount out of this vote to provide a shed, but I will take the matter up with the officials of the department. I understand the amount would be small.


James Joseph Hughes: About $700, I suppose.


Robert Rogers: The officers will take a
note of it, and if it is possible it may be provided for.


James Joseph Hughes: The shed is very necessary.


Robert Rogers: I have no doubt about
that.
Naufrage pond, $2,500.


James Joseph Hughes: Will this complete the work and will tenders be called for?


Robert Rogers: Yes. We will call for
tenders if we can.
Souris-extension of breakwater, $40,000.


James Joseph Hughes: How many feet will the breakwater be extended?


Robert Rogers: Twelve hundred and fifty feet long. The extension is to be forty feet wide over the whole length of twelve hundred and fifty feet; it is to extend to a depth of eighty feet and is to be constructed of creosote timber, with a protecting stone slope on the seaward side, similar to the existing work.


James Joseph Hughes: What is the addition?


Robert Rogers: Four hundred feet.


James Joseph Hughes: Is it the intention of the department to extend it any further than what is under contract at present?


Robert Rogers: No, I think that is quite enough.

Tracadie breakwater, $2,000.


James Joseph Hughes: There is no item here for dredging. Two or three Government dredges belong to the island, and I think they have been slow in getting to work this year. What is the cause of the delay?


Robert Rogers: I did not know there was any delay. I shall he glad to look into the matter. I understood all the dredges are at work.


James Joseph Hughes: In regard to the Prince
Edward Island item, although the Public Works Department build all the wharfs, they transfer some of them to the Department of Marine and Fisheries and keep some themselves. Is there any policy in that respect?


Robert Rogers: I understand there is no fixed policy. It has been found convenient at certain times and at certain places to make the transfer of wharfs, that were constructed by the Public Works Department, to the Department of Marine and Fisheries. It is due probably to the fact that the work of the Department of Marine and Fisheries was more closely connected with particular wharfs.
Quebec-Anse aux Gascons-breakwater repairs and extensions, $3,000.


Mr. MARCIL (Bonaventure):: What is
that for?


Robert Rogers: This is just to complete the work of the repairs and improvements whidh have been in progress for the past two seasons.


Charles Marcil: How much is the extension?


Robert Rogers: It will be one hundred
feet in length and forty feet deep.
Baie St. Paul-repairs to wharf, $1,500.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Repairs have been made already to Baie St. Paul?


Robert Rogers: This is to continue the
repairs that have already been started.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Have any repairs been done this spring?


Robert Rogers: No.
Cap a l'Aigle-extension of wharf, $31,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What is the work there? This point is frequented during the summer by a large number of tourists, and the wharf is very deficient?


Robert Rogers: This amount is to remedy that. We wanted to extend the wharf by one hundred and fifty-six feet.
Cap Chatte-extension of training pier, $7,500.


Rodolphe Lemieux: If this extension is
made, it will give more chance for sailing vessels to get into the river. There was rock right in front of that wharf.


Robert Rogers: That is what the extension is for.
Gaspe-deep water wharf, $01,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: When do you expect to complete that wharf?


Robert Rogers: This season.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The railwhy tracks run on the wharf. What is the sub-structure?


Robert Rogers: Timber. It will be completed this year.
Isle Verte-extension to main wharf, $4,500.


Mr. GAUVREAU:: What kind of extension does the minister propose to make at Isle Verte?


Robert Rogers: On the east side.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: The extension is not to be in the front, but on the side?
Mr. ROGERS. Yes.
Isle Verte-dredging near wharf, $1,500.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: This amount is not
large. I do not see what kind of dredging can be done around the wharf, especially for such a sum as this. There is only six inches of water at low tide, and at high tide about eight feet. If this were for the removal of rocks, I should say it was all right.


Robert Rogers: This work is supposed to be done by scrapers. In view of the fact that the water is very shallow, a certain amount of work can be done to advantage.
L'Anse a Beaufils-harbour improvements, $1,500.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What is proposed to be done there? I would like, while the chief engineer is here, to say that there is a difficulty about the bridge which the municipality intends to remove. When we built the first pier two years ago, the works of the department abutted on the pier of the bridge, and, as a result, the municipality claims, the pier was displaced; and they now intend to erect a bridge a little further up the river. I do not know whether this work under the department is to be up the river or whether it is to extend into the sea. This is a very useful work.


Robert Rogers: It is from the present
site to the old site of the bridge.
At one o'clock, House resumed and then took recess.
House resumed at three o'clock, and again went into Committee of Supply.

Public Buildings, Ont.-Athens public building, $12,000.


Mr. GEAHAM:: When does my hon.
friend expect to have this 'building completed?


Robert Rogers: It will be finished some
time this summer.
Brantford-new public building, $120,000.


George Perry Graham: Will the hon. minister
explain that item?


Robert Rogers: This vote is to make provision for the erection of a new public building at Brantford, on the north side of Dalhousie street, to be used for post office purposes. The contract has been let.


George Perry Graham: There was something
said about selling the building that belongs to the Government in Brantford; has that been done?


Robert Rogers: It has not been sold yet.
Dominion public buildings-renewals, repairs, improvements, &c., $25,000.


George Perry Graham: I suppose these buildings are in different places?


Robert Rogers: This covers general repairs to public buildings throughout the whole province.


George Perry Graham: There is an inspector, is there not, in Toronto?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


George Perry Graham: What is his name?


Robert Rogers: Mr. Hastings.


Edmond Proulx: Is Mr. Charleson still in tne employ of the Government?


Robert Rogers: No.


Edmond Proulx: Has he been dismissed?


Robert Rogers: The position has been abolished; there was no work for him.


Edmond Proulx: Was Mr. Hastings in
office at the same time as Mr. Charleson?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Eganville-public building, $10,000.


George Perry Graham: Has the contract been
let for this building, and on which side of the Bonnechere river is it to be erected?


Robert Rogers: A site has been purchased, but the contract has not been let. There is some difference of opinion as to the 'best site; whether it should be on one side of the river or the other.


George Perry Graham: Which side is the lot on?


Robert Rogers: There is a site on both
sides now, I think.


George Perry Graham: The Bonnechere river
runs through the village of Eganville. The Mr. ROGERS.
south side is in the south riding of Renfrew and the north side is in the north riding. The post office has always been on the south side, in the south riding of Renfrew, and the majority of the people who get their mail there live on the south side of the river. Fire swept the village a few years ago, and the post office was destroyed. The late Government placed an amount in the estimates for a new post office, but did not take any steps towards the purchase of another site.
Strong representations were made by those on the north side for the establishment of a post office there, and as the result a lot-has been purchased on the north side, in the north riding of Renfrew, which would indicate that the post office is to be removed from the south to the north side. It has been intimated that that was the result of a certain event that took place in South Renfrew in February last. I would hardly think that the minister would allow himself to be influenced to such an extent as to take the post office away from a riding in which it has been ever since there was a post office in that district, and place it on the other side of the river merely for that reason. Looking at the matter from a political point of view, I may tell my hon. friend that the people who get their mail at this post office voted for the candidates of the Government in the South Renfrew byelection, far above and beyond the Conservative strength in that vicinity, and in taking away that post office for the purpose of punishing South Renfrew, the hon. minister is really punishing a good many Liberals and Conservatives who voted for* his candidate, because the candidate resided in Eganville on the south side of the river, and got a much larger support in that vicinity than the voters' list would seem to give him. Ever since there has been a post office in Eganville it has been on the south side of the river, and the greater number of the people get their mail on the south side. There are many other reasons which I could submit to the hon. minister why he should leave the post office on the south side of the river. It is very convenient for everybody, and if left on that side will prevent a lot of friction that will arise if the office is removed to the north side.


Robert Rogers: As my hon. friend is aware, I am rather unacquainted with the local conditions which he has so clearly described, but I know something about the facts to which he has referred. There are two locations proposed for this office, and there are also two opinion^ among the people as to where the new post office should be erected. Owdng to this fact the contract has not been let, and, although tenders were called for, the matter is still in abeyance and is receiving consideration. We hope that the department will be able

to have the matter adjusted in some form that will be satisfactory to the great majority of the people. We certainly do not desire to do an injustice to any particular section or locality of that district. My hon. friend has said that the post office has always been located on the south side, and I may say that everything he has said will receive careful consideration before a final decision is reached.


George Perry Graham: Is my hon. friend prepared to say that it will be on the south side ?


Robert Rogers: I would not like to say that, because I am not personally acquainted with the facts.


George Perry Graham: Is my hon. friend going on with this new building this year ?


Robert Rogers: I hope so, if we can decide where we are going to put it.


Edmond Proulx: What was the recommendation of the defeated candidate in the last election ? Did he recommend the south side or the north side ?


Robert Rogers: The south side.


Mr. GERMAN:: There have been several strong representations made to the minister to have a public building erected in the town of Thorold for the purposes of a post office. I had hoped to see something either in the main estimates or in the supplementaries this year, but I do not see anything in that regard. I would like to know if the minister is favourably considering the proposition, and if next year he will see his way clear to erect a post office building in Thorold. Like other towns in that locality, Thorold has reached a degree of business propsperity not hitherto known. Large manufacturing industries have been established there, including one of the largest paper mills in the country. I trust the minister will be able to consider favourably the representations made by the residents.


Robert Rogers: I recall the representations made by the deputation which came from Thorold. My impression at the time was that they had a fairly strong claim. The town seems to be growing, and there are good prospects for the future. I can assure my hon. friend that we will take it up before next session, and see if we cannot meet their views.
Lindsay-drill hall, $95,000.


George Perry Graham: The other day I had an inquiry from a town that has been asked to furnish a site for a drill hall. The Government proposed to build a drill hall for that town if a site was furnished, and as the description of the hall is like the one in Lindsay, they pertinently asked
whether the town of Lindsay had furnished a site.


Robert Rogers: Lindsay appears to have furnished a site.
Newmarket-public building, $20,000.


George Perry Graham: How much of this work is done ? Has the site been purchased ?


Robert Rogers: Nothing has been done, but the site has been purchased.


George Perry Graham: From whom ?


Robert Rogers: The Rev. D. Jones.


George Perry Graham: What was the price ?


Robert Rogers: $2,650 and $2,100.
Orillia-drill hall, $30,000.


George Perry Graham: There seems to have been a standard drill hall adopted, costing $25,000. Here is one at $30,000. It would look as if Orillia were not giving the site. Perhaps that would account for the extra $5,000.


Mr. BENNETT (East Simcoe):: Orillia is giving the site, and quite a valuable one.


George Perry Graham: Would it not be wise to adhere to the uniform standard of drill hall, costing $25,000 ?


Robert Rogers: We are trying to keep to that unform price, but I think in nearly every case the cost of these buildings will reach $30,000.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The tender in this case is under $25,000, as a matter of fact.


Robert Rogers: The fittings are, of course, extra. We have estimated correctly in the case of Orillia, and perhaps a little less in some of the others. We had full and complete information about the Orillia hall before the estimate was made.
Oshawa-drill hall, $40,000.


George Perry Graham: Here is one at $40,000. I am afraid there will be trouble with some of those towns that have $25,000 buildings.


Robert Rogers: This building seems to be a little larger than some of the others, for some reason or another.


George Perry Graham: It may be that they have a greater number of companies. Will $40,000 finish the building ?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Ottawa fuel testing-enlargement of concentrating laboratory, $15,000.


George Perry Graham: Has this anything to do with the testing of peat ?


Robert Rogers: This is the peat factory.


George Perry Graham: Can we get the information from the Minister of Inland Revenue as to what the success has been there?


Robert Rogers: You -will get that information when we reach his estimates.
Ottawa Parliament Buildings-improvements, $15,000.


Robert Rogers: This is for general improvements and maintenance.
Ottawa-new- drill hall, $50,000.


George Perry Graham: Is this to be an armoury or a drill hall? I see there is nothing spent on it. I saw in a paper last night something about an armoury in Ottawa.


Robert Rogers: This is a combination of armoury and drill hall.


George Perry Graham: If it is to he a building of that kind, $50,000 will not amount to much.


Robert Rogers: It will cost much more
than that.


Mr. FRIPP:: A drill hall in Ottawa will cost $300,000. This is only a partial vote for the purpose of obtaining a site.


Edmond Proulx: Would not the new drill hall be erected on the site you have at present?


Alfred Ernest Fripp: There is not enough room
for it there. This amount was in the estimates last year, to make a commencement by securing the site, but nothing has been done.


George Perry Graham: Have you an estimate
for the building.


Robert Rogers: Not yet.


George Perry Graham: How big is the building to be? I do not mean how big a building does the hon. member for Ottawa (Mr. Fripp) want, because that would only be limited by the 'corporate limits of the city, but how big a building does the Alinister of Public Works intend to erect.


Robert Rogers: My deputy tells me that we shall require at least $200,000, for what will be wanted.


Alfred Ernest Fripp: We have twice as many volunteers in the city of Ottawa as there are in any other city in Canada outside of Toronto, and our present drill hall is grossly inadequate. It is an old building Which was erected thirty or forty years ago, and it is unsanitary and in a very bad condition. If we were to use the present site, the militia authorities claim that there would not be sufficient ground for the drilling of the corps upon the space left.


Air. NESBITT:: Can they not drill in the park?


Alfred Ernest Fripp: That would spoil the driveway.
Mr. GRAHAM.


Edmond Proulx: You would have to go
outside of the city to get sufficient ground.


George Perry Graham: Is there any idea as to where this new site is to be? I suppose it is pretty valuable property where the old building is?


Alfred Ernest Fripp: Yes. The first idea was
to try to obtain the property known as the Arena rink. Most hon. gentlemen know where that is, as it is the building in which large public meetings are usually held. It is close to the canal, and the idea was to have the lower part, which is lower than Laurier avenue, used for the guns and batteries and the upper part for ordinary militia purposes. The difficulty is that the Canadian Pacific railway, I think, want to come in on that side of the canal, and that would destroy the property as a site for the drill hall. The hon. Alinister of Militia and Defence (Mr. Hughes), I understand, is in negotiation with the Ontario Government for the present site of the Normal school, or the rear end of it, and it is generally agreed that if that could be secured it would make an ideal site, because the whole square would then be left for drill purposes.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: What about the boys
playing ball there?


Alfred Ernest Fripp: They are allowed to play
ball there during the day, but not when the soldiers are there.


George Perry Graham: I suppose the purchase of this site will be made by the Department of Public Works and not by the Department of Militia and Defence, although the Militia Department will make a recommendation. The Minister of Public Works is wise in not saying where the drill hall is likely to be located, because the price of land will soar immediately if there is any suggestion as to where it is going to he. If it were intended to have it on the Arena property, it would be bad policy to say so in advance, because the Arena property will be almost in the clouds by the time the department is ready to buy it.
Mr.. FRIPP: It has been negotiated for, and a price has been obtained in case that site is determined upon.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: I thought the minister
had adopted the policy of making the _ towns give.the sites.


George Perry Graham: That is the small
towns. I suppose the Ontario Government would not be very hard to make a bargain with since the minister is proposing to give them a nice big subsidy for their railway. Could not a deal be made in the way of a trade-they want something from us and we want something from them?


Robert Rogers: We are awaiting. the
action of the Senate before we go any further with that matter.


George Perry Graham: It seems to be a wise
precaution.
Picton-armoury, $20,000.


George Perry Graham: Is Picton giving the
site?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Port Arthur-drill hall, $19,000.


George Perry Graham: How much is that
going to cost?


Robert Rogers: That will be over $150,-
000.


George Perry Graham: Is that located on the
park site or near the park?


Robert Rogers: Yes, on the park site.


George Perry Graham: This amount appeared
last year and the year before, and it seems to be a .revote this year. The hon. gentleman will put up a much larger building than that sum will indicate?


Mr ROGERS:: Yes, there will be a further vote in the supplementaries.


George Perry Graham: Nothing has been spent yet?


Robert Rogers: We are just letting the
contract.
Toronto-Customs examining warehouse, $500,000.


George Perry Graham: What has been done in connection with this building?


Robert Rogers: We are getting out the
plans; the contract has not yet been let.


George Perry Graham: Where is this building?


Mr. MACDONNELL:: It is on the south side of Front street adjoining to the west, the present customs house. As I understand it, the property has not yet been purchased, but expropriation proceedings have been taken and the usual notice given.


George Perry Graham: $370,000 has been spent; that must have been for the site?


Robert Rogers: That is for the site.


Angus Claude Macdonell: I did not know the purchase had been completed.
Toronto military building-barracks for permanent corps to replace property sold to the city, $250,000.


George Perry Graham: What is this for?


Robert Rogers: This is for a new barracks to replace Stanley barracks.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: What did you get for the old property?


Robert Rogers: $180,000.


William Manley German: Where are the new barracks to be situated?


Angus Claude Macdonell: At Long Branch,
which is ten or fifteen miles out along the lake.


George Perry Graham: What became of the negotiations between the Militia Departnaent and Toronto with reference to some lands owned by the Government, which the exhibition people wanted?


Angus Claude Macdonell: That is the Stanley barracks, and it has gone to the exhibition. This vote is for the erection of a new barracks in place of the Stanley barracks.


Robert Rogers: Before luncheon -some
hon. gentlemen asked that the items for public buildings in New Brunswick should stand: I understand that since an arrangement has been come to, and that we are to proceed with them now.


George Perry Graham: It was asked that the
New Brunswick estimates stand until Mr. Pugsley, who is ill, could be present; but an arrangement has since been made by the whips that the items may be gone on with, on the understanding that on the supplementary estimates any item may be discussed although it may have been adopted.


Robert Rogers: We will be glad to agree to that. We will endeavour to make what progress we can with the main estimates this afternoon, and this will not debar any hon. gentleman from discussing any question when the supplementary estimates are reached.	-


Edward Walter Nesbitt: That is satisfactory.
Winnipeg postal station south, (postal station west, and railway postal station, $275,000.


Frank Oliver: This seems a pretty liberal allowance of postal stations. There is a general post office in Winnipeg which is a fairly central and good building. What is the purpose of these postal stations?


Robert Rogers: These are to be erected
entirely on the recommendation of the officials of the Post Office Department. It is impossible in a growing city to have one post office serve the public as quickly as the establishment of postal stations at different places would do. As far as the items referred to here are concerned, I do not know anything about them. I have never been consulted.


Frank Oliver: This is the first time these votes appear. Does this amount give any indication of the total cost of the buildings?


Robert Rogers: They will not be at all
expensive.


Frank Oliver: What is the intention in regard to these three buildings for the one city in addition to the existing post office? What is the proposed total expenditure on

each building? The first vote is fairly liberal and we would like to know what is to follow.


Robert Rogers: The plans have not yet
been prepared. My deputy minister informs me that from $80,000 to $100,000 will be the cost of each building. In addition to that'there will be the cost of the site.
North Battleford-public building, $30,000.


Robert Rogers: This is a new one. The contract has been let recently.


Frank Oliver: What is the estimated
total cost?


Robert Rogers: About $40,000.
Prince Albert-drill hall, $40,000.


Robert Rogers: This is a new one and
the plan has not been completed yet.


Frank Oliver: The contract is not let.


Robert Rogers: No.
Regina-armoury and drill hall, $100,000.


Robert Rogers: The contract has not been let yet.


Frank Oliver: What is the estimated
total cost?


Robert Rogers: About $200,000.


Frank Oliver: With the site?


Robert Rogers: Probably not.
Athabaska Landing-addition to public building, $1,000.


Frank Oliver: My information is that
the building which is being used there at present for the post office, while it was quite adequate at the time the building was erected, is woefully below the requirements at the present time. The post office, the sub-land agency and the Government telegraph office all occupy the one building. I think some branches of the business have been moved out. A mere repair or improvement of the existing building to the amount of $1,000 will not even measurably meet the requirements at that point now that it has become an important railway terminus.


Robert Rogers: This item is rather small, but there is a further item in the supplementary estimates which will help in this work.
Baesano- public building, $10,000.


Mr. BUCHANAN:: Last year a vote was passed for this building. I understand that during the past year a free site was offered to the Government; that an official of the department examined the site last year, and was satisfied with it. I have a letter here from the municipal council of Bas-sano, asking me to urge that this building shall be placed under construction immediately, because the present postal facilities Mr. OLIVER.
are very inadequate. They would like to ascertain whether the contract will be let and the building placed under construction this year. If the site has been given to the Government, I would urge upon the hon. Minister the commencement of this work as soon as possible in order to meet the demands of the growing town of Bassano.


Robert Rogers: We got a free site from the town, and the work will go on this year.
Calgary-immigration building, $20,000.


Frank Oliver: Is it proposed to erect a new building where the old one is, or is it proposed to have a new site?


Robert Rogers: This completes the new building.


Frank Oliver: When will it be completed?


Robert Rogers: It is practically finished now.
Edmonton-new drill hall, $100,000.


Frank Oliver: W'hat is the position in regard to this? Has the contract been let, or has any action been taken? The hon. Minister of Militia (Mr. Hughes) said the other night that a site had been arranged for by the city.


Robert Rogers: We have got the site, but the contract has not yet been let.


Frank Oliver: Have the plans been prepared?


Robert Rogers: They are in the course of preparation.


Frank Oliver: What is the amount proposed to be expended on the whole building?


Robert Rogers: At least $200,000.


Frank Oliver: When will the contract be let?


Robert Rogers: As soon as we get the plans we will go right ahead.


Frank Oliver: The contract will be let
during the summer?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Frank Oliver: In time to do work this fall?


Robert Rogers: The chief architect says he will be sure to get the foundation in this fall any way.
Lethbridge-public building, $150,000.


William Ashbury Buchanan: Has the minister
kept in mind in this case the fact that in Moosejaw, Saskatoon and other western cities, it has been found necessary to build larger post offices within a very few years after new buildings had been erected? Will the Lethbridge building be up to the standard of the new buildings at Saska-

toon and Moosejaw? We expect development in Lethbridge, and in designing this building attention should be paid to the future and a building provided that will meet development, so that it may not he as in the other cases where new buildings have to be constructed? What will be the ultimate cost of the building at Lethbridge?


Robert Rogers: We have kept in mind
the rapid development and future prospects of Lethbridge. The building when completed will have cost $275,000, and that ought to be sufficient to meet the requirements for some time to come.


William Ashbury Buchanan: When will it be
completed and ready for occupation?


Robert Rogers: The contract is let and
the building is under way. Under the contract it is to be completed in September, 1914.
Medicine Hat-immigration building, $20,000.


Frank Oliver: I see that there is provision for immigration buildings not only at Medicine Hat but at Calgary. In this ' connection I desire to call attention to the fact that the immigration building at Edmonton is very seriously below immediate requirements. There is no fault to be found with the buildings in themselves, but with the conditions that now exist they are insufficient. Edmonton is a central point for railway distribution, with six or eight lines radiating into the country that is now being occupied. It will necessarily be such a point as Winnipeg for the distribution of immigration. I think the time has come when it would be much in the interest of immigration work if an up-to-date building were erected of a capacity to properly take care of the movement of immigration which must necessarily for many years radiate from Edmonton. The country to the south and east is very largely filled, but the country to the north, northeast and northwest of Edmonton is still vacant except within a short distance.


Robert Rogers: We will take a note of
that, and will take it up with the Immigration Department and learn what their recommendations are. Of course, we only provide the building.	,


William Ashbury Buchanan: Will the buildings at Medicine Hat be placed under construction this year?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Strathcona-armoury, $8,000.


Frank Oliver: What is the condition
with regard to this building?


Robert Rogers: The contract has been
let. This vote is to complete the.work.
Strathcona-public building, $8,000.


Frank Oliver: And how about this?


Robert Rogers: This is to complete.


Frank Oliver: Last year $30,000 was
appropriated?


Robert Rogers: Yes; $42,000 has been
paid out thus far.
Vegreville-public building, $15,000.


Frank Oliver: Has anything been spent on this building yet?


Robert Rogers: No.


Frank Oliver: Have the plans been prepared? Has anything been done?


Robert Rogers: No.


Frank Oliver: Is it contemplated to go on with the erection of the building at an early date?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Frank Oliver: To what purpose is this
building to be devoted?


Robert Rogers: Customs, inland revenue, post office and land offices.
Wetaskiwin-public building, $8,000.


Frank Oliver: The same question with
regard to this.


Robert Rogers: Substantial progress has been made v, ith this building, and this vote is to complete. Twenty-one thousand dollars has been paid out thus far.
Public Works-chargeable to income-British	Columbia-Ashcroft-public	'building,


Mr. FOWLER:: I understand that there has been some dispute with regard to the site for this building and that a protest was filed against the proposed site which is in the Chinese portion of the town near the Thompson river. A considerable number of the people were anxious to have a site in a different part of the town. The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Burrell) might be able to give information, as Ashcroft is in his constituency, I believe. I have had correspondence with people there on this subject. I have some interest in Ashcroft personally, and that is why I ask the question.


Robert Rogers: I have no special knowledge of the location, never having been in Ashcroft. But the site was selected on the recommendation of officers of the department as the best in the public interest.


George William Fowler: Were officers sent there specially to ascertain?


Robert Rogers: Yes. We will send my
hon. friend their report, and will let- him know the amount paid.


George William Fowler: I should like it if the
minister would do that.
Magdalen Islands

breakwaters and piers, $15,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I suppose this item applies not to new works, but to the extension and repair of the old?


Mr ROGERS:: Yes. 350 foot breakwater extending from Cape Gradley to New Channel, $4,000; completion of New Channel, $3,000; Pointe a Elie, to construct 100 foot extension to breakwater, $8,000; total $15,000.
Tvjicolet-repairs and renewals to wharf, $1*500.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Has a contract been let for this work?


Robert Rogers: The contract has not been let.
River Batiscan-landing piers, $20,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What is the nature of the improvements here? Is this for dredging or for an extension of the pier?


Robert Rogers: Repairs to and extension of present wharf.


Rodolphe Lemieux: It is a very useful work, because when the wind is high, vessels get near that wharf. Some dredging was done there some years ago, which unfortunately was not very well performed. I hope it will be well done this year.
Riviere du Loup-wharf improvements, $50,000.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: What does the hon. minister intend to do at Riviere-du-Loup? How much will the work cost?


Robert Rogers: I understand that it will cost about $400,000. Part of it is in connection with the Railway Department.
Mr. GAUVREAU; I have asked the Minister of Railways what he intends to do with the $78,000 he is prepared to spend at Riviere-du-Loup, and he says that as soon as the Minister of Public Works is ready to start, he will follow him. Is the minister going to start this work this summer?
Mr. ROGERS; We will call for tenders right away.-
St. Jean des Chaillons-wharf improvements, $3,200.


Mr. FORTIER:: What has been done at the wharf there?


Robert Rogers: Improvements have been made on the approach to the present wharf.
Ste. Majorfque-approaches	to bridge,


Mr LEMIEUX:: Does that cover the last gap?
Mr. ROGERS.


Robert Rogers: It is expected to do so.
Trois Pistoles harbour-repairs to south pier and approaches, $5,000.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: Is the minister going to ask for tenders for this work? I see there are two items, one for the repairs to the south pier and approaches, and the other for an extension to the south pier.


Robert Rogers: The engineer thinks the
work can best be done by day's labour.
Ontario, harbours and rivers-Callender- wharf extension, $7,000.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: What are you doing at
Callender?


Robert Rogers: Extending the wharf.
Lake Nipissing-improvement of navigable channel in west arm leading through Shanty lake to Monetville, $1,500.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: What is that for?


Robert Rogers: For a small canal between the two lakes. This is to complete the work.
Madawaska river-deepening channel, $5,000.


George Perry Graham: Where is that-work to be done?


Robert Rogers: Three miles above Combermere, in the county of South Renfrew.


George Perry Graham: Between Combermere
and Palmer Rapids?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Montreal river-improvements above Latch-ford, $50,000.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: What do you propose to do on Montreal river?


Robert Rogers: This is for the completion of the Latchford dam.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: How is this amount made up?


Robert Rogers: Log slide, piers, booms,
and river improvements, $17,000; log lifting machinery, &c., for dam, $3,000; improvements in Port Rapids, $3,500; balance of land damages, estimated at $5,000; to pay contractors for plant, materials and effective unwatering $26,500; contingencies $5,000.
Os haw a-harbour improvements, $50,000.


George Perry Graham: Is that for the purchase of the wharf, or for the improvement of the wharf? A number of small towns had harbours of their own, which have been taken over by the Government, I think.


Robert Rogers: This is for repairing the
wharf.


George Perry Graham: Do we own the wharf?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Picnic Islands-improvement Of channel,


George Perry Graham: This is a new item.


Robert Rogers: This is for the channel
between Manitoulin island and the mainland.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Seven or eight years ago, I made very serious charges relative to the dredging contracts in the province of Ontario. These were afterwards brought up before what was known as the Morine Commission, and it was shown that during the decade ending 1910 some $20,000,000 worth of dredging had been done under contract. Among the charges which I made, and which were established by that commission were that persons who put in what were ostensibly competitive tenders, frequently had in advance an understanding as to what price each should charge. The commission reports:
That persons, who put in what are ostensibly competitive tenders, frequently have an understanding with each other in advance, as to what prices each shall bid, is quite evident on the face of the tenders themselves. The following is a clear instance, though it is not the only one. In 1907, tenders were called for dredging at Midland and Waubaushene, and the Canadian 'Dredge and Construction Company, and the Penetanguishene Dredge Company each put in separate tenders for the work to be done at each of these two points, the tender of one company being the lower of the two at Midland, and the tender of the other company being the lower at Waubaushene. All four tenders bore the same date, were apparently filled out in the same handwriting, and were inclosed in envelopes endorsed by the same person. That no importance was assigned to this incident is shown by the fact that the contract for Midland was nevertheless awarded to one of these two tenders.


Mr. CARVELL:: That is all ancient history, and we want to pass these estimates to-day.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have made my statement inside and outside of this House, I have been contradicted by the ex-Minister of Public Works, and I am going to put myself right.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Nobody will read it.


Richard Bedford Bennett: As a result of the inquiry that has been held, every statement made by me that there was fraudulent tendering, has been proved up to the hilt. I make the charge now, and I am sorry that the ex-Minister of Public Works is not in his place.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: There is an arrangement that we should give this afternoon to the supplementaries.


George Perry Graham: We have made an arrangement, we are trying to put these estimates through, and if the hon. gentleman will allow me, the ex-Minister of
Public Works will be here on Monday, and the discussion can take place then.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Then I will reserve my remarks until the ex-minister is here.
Port	Burwell-harbour	improvements,


George Perry Graham: A claim was made by
a company about work at Port BuTwell some years ago, I understand, to the Public Works Department. Perhaps I am mistaken in the place.


Robert Rogers: Yes, it is Port Stanley.


George Perry Graham: Has that claim been
settled?


Robert Rogers: No.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: How much more expense is likely to he incurred at Port Bur-well?


Robert Rogers: This is the full amount for the final estimate.
Port Credit-purchase of property for harbour, $30,000.


George Perry Graham: That seems to be new.


Robert Rogers: We are purchasing a
harbour there.
Port	Stanley-harbour	improvements,


Edward Walter Nesbitt: What further expense
is likely to b.e incurred there besides this amount?


Robert Rogers: This work is under contract, and this amount is expected to complete the work.
River St. Lawrence-improvement of Canadian channel between Kingston and. Brock-ville, $40,000.


George Perry Graham: How long will it take to complete that work? It has not gone on very rapidly.


Robert Rogers: This is supposed to complete the work. It has been rather slow up to date.


George Perry Graham: This must be the channel 'between Brockville and Kingston. It will make a channel on the Canadian side, or what we call the inside channel, between a group of islands and the Canadian side. This is a good deal of importance to shipping as it makes a shorter channel. It is of somewhat more importance to Gananoque perhaps than to Brockville. On the American side there is so much tourist traffic and there are so many small boats that the larger vessels are impeded in their progress. This new channel will relieve that to a great extent and the vesselmen are anxious that the work should be completed as quickly as possible.


Robert Rogers: It will he completed right away.



Sault Ste. Marie-harbour improvements, $150,000.
'Mr. GRAHAM: These improvements appear to be pretty extensive.


Robert Rogers: This is dredging for
widening the channel at the entrance to the canal.


George Perry Graham: What entrance?


Robert Rogers: Below the Canadian lock.
Public works chargeable to income-Manitoba-Gull harbour-repairs to wharf, $3,000.


Frank Oliver: Where is Gull harbour?


Robert Rogers: It is fifty-one miles from
the mouth of the Red river on Icelandic island.
Le Pas-wharf, $30,000.


Frank Oliver: Why is it that the wharf at Le Pas costs $30,000 and the wharf at Edmonton on the same river only costs $10,000?


Robert Rogers: Has the wharf at Edmonton been completed?


Frank Oliver: I do not think it has been completed; it is in progress.


Mr. HENDERSON:: It may cost $20,000 more.


Frank Oliver: This is only a preliminary vote for Le Pas and I want to start them even.


Robert Rogers: I will have to get my hon. friend the information as I do not know the facts.


George Perry Graham: On which side of the
river at Le Pas is the wharf? There are two wharfs on the south side now.


Robert Rogers: It is opposite the Hudson Bay wharf, wherever that is.


George Perry Graham: That is on the south
side; it is in Le Pas proper. The Hudson Bay stores are on the south side too.
Red river-improvements, $80,000.


Frank Oliver: What are these Red river improvements?


Robert Rogers: This is for blasting rock in the channel of the Red river just below the lower entrance to St. Andrew's lock, estimated at 10,000 cubic yards. It is an extension of the work commenced in 1910 which consists of two rows of piles, part bolted together and sheet piled and it is to extend this work to nine feet of water that the appropriation is asked. We are getting much larger boats on the Red river than we had previously and there are some rocky parts below the locks.


Frank Oliver: I asked the question with the view of ascertaining whether the object Mr. ROGERS.
of this work was to secure greater depth and a better flow.


Robert Rogers: That is the idea.
Athabasca river-removal of boulders and improvements to channel, $11,000.


Frank Oliver: What work was actually done under the last vote, and what is to be done under the present vote. I have personal knowledge of the conditions there and it is a very important work.


Robert Rogers: The work to be done is
the removal of boul'ders and general improvement of navigation afi the Grand Rapids and at a number of smaller rapids between Grand Rapids and FortMcMurray; also removing scattered rocks iat the Athabasca Landing which are a menace to the steamers navigating the river. The work started in 1910-11 and since then a large pprtion of the channel has been improved, but a number of rocks must still be removed.


Frank Oliver: Is it intended to do work at the rapids known as the Big and Little Cascades?
Mr."ROGERS:	The chief engineer has
no definite information on that point.


Frank Oliver: The removal of the boulders in the Grand Rapids and the rapids below opened the channel, but at the Big and Little Cascades there is a limestone ridge right across the river, which would require to be out through to make the improvement substantial.


Robert Rogers: This vote would not be sufficient to cover that.


Frank Oliver: I impress on the minister the desirability not only of clearing boulders out of the rapids above and the rapids below, but also making such a cut in the Big and Little Cascades as will allow loaded scows to run down. At present the scows have to be partially unloaded to navigate there, and tlhe portaging of the freight adds greatly to the expense. Were the work I suggest done, it would be of tremendous advantage to the trade of that northern country. I would urge on the minister to provide sufficient money to make a clear scow channel all the way from the head of the Grand Rapids to the foot of the Mountain Rapids. I also urge on the minister the necessity for constructing a roadway or tramway on the right bank of the Athabasca at the Grand Rapids which are about half a mile long. On an island in the river theie the Hudson Bay Company built a tramway, and while the scow runs down the current the goods are taken over that tram wav, but, at the foot of the island, where there is another rapids called the Little Grand, the water is extremely rough.

115l
There should be a substantial roadway or tramway on the right bank of the river, starting at the hea'd of the rapids and terminating below the Little Grand.


Robert Rogers: What distance?


Frank Oliver: Perhaps a mile. It is hardly likely the channel could 'be so cleared that a full loaded scow could navigate down, but with the improvements I suggest, a partially loaded scow could pass there. My suggestion is that the minister should make provision to cut a channel in the Big and Little Cascades, and provide a roadway or tramway from the smooth water above to the smooth water below the Grand and Little Grand Rapids.


Robert Rogers: The chief engineer has
taken note of the representations made by the hon. member (Mr. Oliver) and the district engineer at Edmonton will be asked to make an official report so that we may understand the needs of the situation. Prince Albert-protection works, $16,000.


Frank Oliver: What protection works are needed at Prince Albert?


Robert Rogers: Protection of the bank of the river right at the city where there is a wharf.


Frank Oliver: At Edmonton there is a condition requiring the protection of the bank, which is much more extreme and urgent than that prevailing at Prince Albert. At Prince Albert the bank is low; whereas at Edmonton the bank is 200 feet high, and the main street of the city passes within 200 feet of the top of the hill. There has been a great deal of sliding in the past. The idea is that the current of the river, since the bridge has been erected, has been driven more strongly against that bank than before. The late Government had that matter under consideration; surveys were made, and the wharf that is now under construction was, as in the case of Prince Albert, partially intended for protective purposes. I am glad that the Government has seen fit to continue at Prince Albert the protection afforded by the wharf. Recognizing the responsibility of the Government for the protection of the banks of the river, I wish to urge that a similar but a more extreme condition of affairs exists at Edmonton. It would be right that an appropriation should be made for the further protection of the bank, which is now being protected by the wharf but only to a limited degree.


Robert Rogers: I do not know the conditions at Prince Albert; but I know the conditions at Edmonton, and they require some consideration in view of the fact that the banks are very high and' the water seems to wash away the earth very rapidly. I understand considerable work has been
3634	*
done in the way of piling in order to protect the bank. The matter will be looked into imemdiately.


Mr. DOUGLAS:: On the south side of the river the same conditions prevail as on the north side. There is a valuable piece of land on the south side of the river which the bend of the river is cutting away. I have had representations from the city of Edmonton regarding the matter, and I understand that one of the aldermen was here during the winter in regard to the same matter. I have not heard what the result of his' interview was. I trust the minister will see if he can do something to protect the bank on the south side.


Robert Rogers: I was asked by the gentleman to go to Edmonton. As soon as the session closes I shall be pleased to do so.
Saskatchewan river-improvements, $50,000'.


Frank Oliver: What has been done in regard to the improvements and in regard to the special surveys of the rapids?


Robert Rogers: This is just confined to surveys that have been going on for some time with a view to the improvement of navigation.
Surveys of rapids, &c., on north and south Saskatchewan rivers and other navigable streams, $45,000.


Frank Oliver: That seems to be a new item.


Robert Rogers: The deputy minister informs me that these are special detail surveys that have to be made in order to ascertain exactly whether we can overcome the difficulties. The first item was a general survey of the river for some distance.


Frank Oliver: Are these surveys with a view to development of water power or for navigation?


Robert Rogers: For navigation.
Lewes and Yukon rivers improvements.


Frank Oliver: I see that the usual appropriation for Lewes and Yukon rivers improvements has been dropped.


Robert Rogers: It was dropped because no application was made for its renewal. There did not seem to be any necessity for it.


Frank Oliver: It was a sort of standing item. The conditions on the Lewes and Yukon rivers are very changeable, and I am under the impression that there is a continual necessity for taking care of the channel. Possibly it would be unfortunate if means were not provided to have the channel taken care of from year to year.
Dredge vessels repairs, $452,000.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Why is there such a

large increase in dredge vessels repairs this year?


Robert Rogers: We are getting more
dredges every year, and we sometimes require to refit the old ones.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: This is for repairs. It does not take in the new ones.
(Mr. ROGERS:	We sometimes take in
old dredges and refit them. This covers matters of that kind.


William Manley German: A year or two ago I
brought to the attention of the House a proposition, which I believe is thoroughly sound, that is, that the Government is losing money by keeping dredges and doing dredging work itself instead of allowing it to be done by public tender. I wish to call the hon. minister's attention to what I said and the figures I gave at that time, and to ask him to look into the question. I am convinced that the dredging which is done by the Government with the Government dredges is costing in this country more money than the same dredging would cost if done by public tender. In estimating the cost of dredging the department does not take into consideration such items as depreciation, insurance and many others , for which the dredging contractor must provide if he is to succeed. And it is certain the employees on Government dredges do not do in a day anything like the quantity of work that is done under a contractor. Not that the captains on the Government dredges are not good men, but they cannot get the work out of the men under them. It is time the Government considered seriously whether they should continue to maintain their great fleets of dredges. The suggestion I now make, I brought before the former Government. I believed then as I believe now, that it would pay the Government to do away entirely with their dredging plant and have all dredging work done 'by tender and contract. I know the suggestion is made that the contractors form a pool. If there is a considerable amount of harbour work to be done, the contractors get together and agree to put in bids on the various works in such form that it is decided in advance who is to be the lowest tenderer for each work. I believe that is done and probably always will be done. But, notwithstanding that, I believe that the department would get the work done more cheaply under contract than by keeping up this enormous cost of dredging plant. There is this item of $452,000 for dredge vessels repairs, and a similar amount must be spent every year. Then there is the new dredging plant for the maritime provinces, $119,800; the new dredging plant for Ontario and Quebec West. $257,000; new dredging plant for Manitoba, Saskatchewan Mr. NESBTTT.
and Alberta, $10,000; new dredging plant for British Columbia, $195,000; new dredging plant generally-whatever that may mean-$170,000. And there are other items besides. These are enormous sums. I feel very strongly that if the question were fully looked into by the officers of the department they would find that the work could be done better by contract, doing away with this great Government dredging plant.


Robert Rogers: I confess that when I
went over to the Public Works Department I had exactly the same idea as my hon. friend appears to have, and one of the first things I discussed with some of the officers of the department was the question of endeavouring to do away with Government dredges and let the work by contract. However, that will take a very considerable time; there are many practical difficulties in the way when one comes to work it out. There are a number of dredges in inland places. It is impossible to move these dredges, because they cannot be got into navigable streams to be floated to other parts of the country. Then there is the' argument, mentioned by the hon. gentleman, that the fact that the Government has these dredges, regulates prices and controls contractors to some extent. Of course, I have not gone into the matter in detail and am not in a position to say whether the opinion expressed by the hon. gentleman is correct or not. But I confess I had the same idea, and I confess I have the same idea still. Perhaps, after a time, when I am able to give more consideration to it, it will be my endeavour to work to the end of doing away -as far as possible with our own dredging plant and adopting the system of doing our dredging by contract. But the hon. gentleman will understand that the practical working out of this plan will take a considerable time.


William Manley German: Quite so. One other
thing I would like to mention: The minister must remember that a contractor, in order to be in a position to do work required of him, must maintain a very considerable plant, and if there is not work for that plant to do, the owner cannot keen it in shape. We are often met here in Canada with the suggestion that American dredges should come in, and American dredges have been brought in. Why? Simply because the Government maintains a large dredging plant which is in opposition to the contractors, who are in that business, and who may find it unprofitable to maintain their plants under that opposition. I cannot believe that the fact of the Government having this plant really regulates or keeps down prices. It ' certainly cannot always do so. These Government dredges are more or less tied to certain localities, and certainly when

work is to be done in a locality where there is no Government dredge, the Government dredging plant cannot be a regulator of prices. I am glad to have heard what the minister has said. I know the problem is a serious one. It has been in existence for thirty or forty years, and to work out the solution of it will take time. I am glad that he agrees with me to a certain extent at any rate, that it is well to work out this problem.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Are these repairs done
in Canada?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: I see that the minister
is building a new dredging plant for British Columbia, and also one for Ontario and Quebec. Are these dredges built in Canada, or do you contract for them elsewhere?


Robert Rogers: They are all built in
Canada.


Mr. BURNHAM:: As to this idea that
the Government cannot do in relation to dredging what contractors can do, I do not see why that conclusion should be accepted. I maintain that the keeping of the Government dredging plant is the best method. If there is any argument against the keeping of a dredging plant, it applies against the private owner as well as against the Government. That is quite plain. I doubt if there is any other branch of service with which greater swindles have been connected than with dredging. There is no such thing, however, in connection with dredging done by the Government. Under the system of dredging by private firms or contractors, unnecessary work is frequently done and dredges often unnecessarily .employed, in many cases for the purpose of giving jobs to persons owning private dredges. The department may not be to blame but the system should be cut out.
New dredging plant-Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, $10,000.


Frank Oliver: Where is the work to be done in Saskatchewan and Alberta?


Robert Rogers: There is some dredging to be done near Qu'Appelle.


Frank Oliver: Where is this dredge to be employed?


Robert Rogers: It is for general river
work in Saskatchewan.


Frank Oliver: On the Saskatchewan
river?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Mr. THOMSON:: I understand that there is some dredging to be done at Fort Qu'Appelle?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Frank Oliver: I do not see here any
mention of dredging work to be done in Alberta.


Robert Rogers: There is nothing in this item for Alberta.


Frank Oliver: Then the item is hardly
proper, as it says: 'Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta.' Has the department any intention of entering upon a policy of dredging the Saskatchewan river?


Robert Rogers: No.


Frank Oliver: They are dredging only
on the Qu'Appelle river?


Robert Rogers: The dredge is to be employed in doing light work; picking up small boulders and things of that kind.
New dredging plant-generally, $170,000.


Mr. BOIVIN:: What is the meaning of this item?


Robert Rogers: This is simply a term
used in connection with the bookkeeping of the department, applying to a plant used in two provinces-in Quebec and Ontario, for example.
Dredging-Ontario and Quebec, $875,000.


Georges Henri Boivin: I would like to ask the
hon. minister if the Government has an3 intention of continuing the dredging on the Richelieu river, county of St. Johns, or if that work has been entirely abandoned? A certain amount of dredging was done by the late Government, which was of great benefit to the farmers on the Richelieu river between the town of St. Johns and lake Champlain and which at the same time had a lot to do with the level of the water in the harbour at St. Johns.


Robert Rogers: That matter was rather
mixed up with the levels of lake Champlain; it was an international affair in a way.


Georges Henri Boivin: I do not understand that the work in the harbour at St. Johns could have anything to do with the level of lake Champlain, because I understood that a dam was to be installed lower down in order to maintain the level of the water.


William Manley German: How much of the dredging under this item will be done in Ontario, and how much in Quebec?


Robert Rogers: It takes about $300,000 to run our own dredging plants, and we try to divide the balance as equally as we can between the two provinces.


Georges Henri Boivin: I did not quite understand whether the minister told me he had definitely decided to abandon the work at St. Johns.


Robert Rogers: No, quite the reverse; we are going on with the dredging.
Roads and 'bridges-Edmonton bridge across North Saskatchewan river-renewing of floor-;ng, &c., $3,000.


Frank Oliver: Was $4,000 spent on the flooring of the Edmonton bridge last year?


Robert Rogers: Only $362 was spent last year.


Frank Oliver: This bridge was built by the Dominion Government as a traffic and railway bridge. In order that it may be used as a traffic bridge the flooring has to be kept up, but during last summer it was not kept up. The city was allowed to lay street car tracks on the bridge, and in that connection some responsibility rests on it in regard to the flooring. But, I submit, the Dominion Government is responsible for its upkeep. During last summer, under my own observation, the flooring was in very bad condition. I see that $3,000 is voted for this year, and I would urge the minister, and upon the Government, to take the responsibility of seeing that the flooring is kept in good order. I am not asking that the city be relieved of its proper share of the responsibility, but the main responsibility rests upon the Dominion Government, who built the bridge, and it is for them to see that the city does its duty.


Robert Rogers: I am afraid my hon.
friend is a little mistaken in regard to this bridge. As he knows, it was originally built by the Dominion Government, and afterwards an arrangement was made with the city and with the railway company, by which they were to do certain things, and the city, the Government and the railway company were each to pay one-third of the upkeep. It was understood that the city was to look after the work, and render an account to the Government and to the railway company for their respective shares. We have had a bill for only $362 for work done last year, so it would appear that the fault lies with the corporation of Edmonton, and not with the Government.


Frank Oliver: I have no desire to shield the city. This bridge is the Government's bridge, towards the construction of which tlhe city contributed $25,000. Whatever agreement the Government may have made with the city and the railway company, it is for the Government to see that it is lived up to, and that the bridge is kept in good condition. If the other parties to the agreement do not make good, it is for the Government to see that they do.


Robert Rogers: One would naturally suppose that the city, which is directly interested, would see that the bridge was kept Mr. BOIVLN.	I
in proper repair, when all they have to do is to have it properly attended, and to render an account to the Government and to the railway company, that being the arrangement which exists. Apparently, they are at fault in this case. Of course we can get after them and see that they do the work next year.
Interprovincial bridge across Ottawa river at Hawkesbury, the Ontario and Quebec Governments to each contribute $15,Q00-revote, $50,600.


Edmond Proulx: Is it the intention of the Government to go on with this work this year?


Robert Rogers: Yes, at any rate, we are going to try.


Edmond Proulx: Has the right of way
from the town to the river been purchased?


Robert Rogers: Not yet.


Edmond Proulx: The bridge would have
to cross an island which belongs to the Hawkesbury Lumber company. In 1911 we could not come to any arrangement with the company, and the Government expropriated it, that is, they registered the plan and description of the right of way. The department had previously offered $5,000 to the Hawkesbury Lumber company for the right of way but they would not accept it. Have they now accepted the compensation offered?


Robert Rogers: No, but . the engineer
thinks we can get a more desirable line.


Edmond Proulx: I suppose the right of
way will have to cross the island anyway?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Edmond Proulx: It would not be so
straight a road as the one selected in 1911?


Robert Rogers: I am told that it will
make no material difference in regard to the location. The object is to get round the difficulties which the proprietors are trying to create in regard to the securing of a site.


Edmond Proulx: Have they offered to sell the right of way?


Robert Rogers: We will have to expropriate.
Telegraph lines-Saskatchewan and Alberta -construction of line from Athabasca Landing to Fort McMurray, $7,700.


Frank Oliver: What progress has been
made in the work of constructing this line? When is it likely to be completed?


Robert Rogers: It is expected that the
work will be completed this summer.


Frank Oliver: I understand they made very little progress last summer?


Robert Rogers: They were getting out the poles and material, and they hope to make better progress now.


Frank Oliver: Does the line follow along the Athabasca river, from Athabasca Landing to House river, or does it go to Lac la Bicbe and back to the river?


Robert Rogers: The line follows the Athabasca river.


Frank Oliver: All the way to House river ?


Robert Rogers: All the way to House river, a distance of about thirty miles.
Public Works-chargeable to income-miscellaneous-monument to the memory of the late Hon. Thomas D'Arcy McGee, $10,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I have noticed this item in the estimates for several years. I have seen the statue in Mr. Hill's studio in Montreal. When do you intend to erect the statue and where ? As regards the Lafontaine-Baldwin monument, an amount has been voted several times and I understand that the monument is completed, too. Have you arrived at any conclusion as regards this monument ?


Robert Rogers: The monuments are not completed, but will be very shortly.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The McGee monument is completed; I have seen it.


Robert Rogers: Yes, but the other one is not; it will he completed in about three months. We have not yet selected the site. We will be glad to receive suggestions from any hon. gentleman who can give us an idea as to the most desirable location.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The monument to La-fontaine and Baldwin is a peculiar one, it is not of the same style as the monuments we have around the building here, and you will have to select a special spot for it.


Robert Rogers: We will take note of that.
Monument to Ilis late Majesty King Edward VII., $20,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Who obtained the contract for that ?


Robert Rogers: Mr. Allward.
Monument to Madeleine de Verclieres, to be erected at Vercberes, $20,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Hebert, I suppose, has that ?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Rodolphe Lemieux: When do you expect to have that monument erected ?


Robert Rogers: It is being cast in France now.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Belgium.
Deep Waterways Commission-inclusive of payments authorized to William J. Stewart, chief hydrographic surveyor, Department of Naval Service, as a member of the board of commissioners, also for the definition and demarcation of the international boundary between the United States and Canada from Pigeon river to (St. (Regis, as provided for by article 4 of the treaty of April (11, 1908. $60,000.


George Perry Graham: What are they doing now ?


Robert Rogers: They are charting the boundary line and then they have to complete their report on the proposed dam at the outlet of Lake Erie.


George Perry Graham: Has that work been done by the American Government ?


Robert Rogers: No, they are just investigating it.


William Manley German: Is it contemplated that there should be a dam put across_ the Niagara river at the foot of Lake Erie in order to keep the water of the lake up to a certain specified level ?


Robert Rogers: That has been suggested aind the idea of this commission is to make us a report upon it so that we will know whether it is feasible or not.


William Manley German: Is Mr. Coste acting as engineer for the Deep Waterways Commission?


Robert Rogers: Yes, he is supposed to
be acting, but he is away now.


William Manley German: His idea was to put
submerged dams in the Niagara river. Gan the minister give ns any information sa to what is being done in regard to that?


Robert Rogers: We have no report from them as to the feasibility of that idea.


George Perry Graham: Who are the members
of that commission? This is the commission that was composed of American members and Canadian members, is it not?


Robert Rogers: No, this commission is composed of Sir George Gibbons, Mr. Coste and Mr. Stewart. You are referring to the International Waterways Commission. That does not come under my department.
River St. Lawrence and Great Lakes Waterways Commission, $49,000.


George Perry Graham: What commission is
that?


Robert Rogers: This item has been in the estimates for some time and we have not been able to get the commission appointed, but we hope to shortly. This is the commission that was practically arranged for by my predecessor in appointing Mr. McLeod and Mr. Surveyor of Montreal. Mr. McLeod found it impossible to

act and give his whole time to the work. It is very desirable to secure him as head of the commission. He was here a few days ago and he informed, us that he hopes shortly to be able to give us a decided answer, as to whether or not he will be able to devote practically all his time to this work.


Edmond Proulx: Is he a civil engineer?


Robert Rogers: Yes, he is in McGill
University.


George Perry Graham: As I understand, they are to make an investigation of the St. Lawrence, the powers upon it and the effect of the development of these powers upon navigation. What portion of the St. Lawrence will their work cover?


Robert Rogers: All the way from Montreal to lake Ontario and all over. You can understand the difficulty which confronts the department. We are continually receiving applications about power plants and so on, and it is very difficult for the department, without having a commission of that kind to advise us as to what the effect of the granting of such an application might be upon the water or upon existing' powers, to deal with these applications.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Who have been selected for this commission?


Robert Rogers: We have selected Mr. McLeod, Mr. Suveyer and Mr. CoutlSe of the department.


George Perry Graham: There is this difficulty connected with getting a report with regard to power in one locality only: You might send your departmental engineers to get a report upon the effect of the development of a water power in one locality. The report, as far as that locality was concerned, might be quite accurate but the development of the power might affect some other locality upon which you have no report. The commission is the only means of getting the information.


Robert Rogers: That is the idea.


George Perry Graham: The deepening of the canal through to Montreal is a pretty big problem in relation to the water supply in some of the lakes.


Robert Rogers: This extends their power to make an examination of the lakes tributary to the St. Lawrence river, so that they may have the widest possible power to examine into these questions.
Slides and booms generally, $5,000.
Mr.. GRAHAM: I have a complaint to make. An employee of the Government in South Renfrew took a very active part in the election, on the wrong side, of course for me, but on the Conservative side. I
Mr. ROGERS.
- have not asked for his dismissal because to err is human, and I know he would not be dismissed anyway. But another Government employee was favourable to me, and he was dismissed. The man who opposed me got a bouquet, and the other poor fellow was discharged.


Robert Rogers: That must have been before I went to the department.


George Perry Graham: To save any heated discussion, we will blame it on your predecessor.
Land and cable telegraph lines-Lower St. Lawrence and maritime provinces, $5,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Some years ago, Mr. Pugsley, when Minister of Public Works, granted to my old constituents in the Magdalen Islands a cheap rate for telegraph letters, between Meat Cove and the Magdalen Islands. That was a great boon to the people, who are cut off from communication with the outside world for several months in the winter. Later, I was able to obtain Marconi wireless connection with the islands and I asked the Government to send a weekly summary of news to the people. The Government sent this sum- ' mary by wireless and sometimes by cable, and it was supposed to be an unbiassed and non-partisan account of the news. The gentleman now charged with this correspondence is Mr. J. E. LaForce, now I think in the employ of the Minister of Inland Revenue.


Mr. NANTEL:: I do not think so.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Have you a gentleman by that name in your department?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I do not know but I do not think so.


Rodolphe Lemieux: He was in the employ
of the Inland Revenue Department last year, and now I am told he is in the Interior Department. I have no objection to the Government giving him a job nor have I objection to him drawing his regular salary, as he is paid $5 by the Postmaster General for sending this news to the Magdalen Islands. Since the opening of navigation I have received some of these reports and I regret to say they are very biassed, strongly partisan, and such as should not be countenanced by the Government. I do not wish to injure Mr. LaForce in the least, but the ministers from my province especially should warn Mr. LaForce that this news is being sent at the expense of Liberals and Conservatives alike, and should be an unprejudiced and impartial account of what takes place.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: That same Mr. La-
Force is now the secretary of a commission nominated by the Department of the Interior to make investigation as to immigration to the province of Quebec. He is the

same man who has been charged in the newspapers in Quebec as having tried to bribe the Rev. Ivanhoe Caron to make him testify against Mr. Devlin's department in the provincial Government. It is really a case of blackmail, and as Mr. LaForce is in the Department of Public Works, the minister should see that he conducts himself properly.


Robert Rogers: This is entirely new to
me. I have never heard of Mr. LaForce that I know of, but I shall be pleased to draw to the attention of the minister in charge of the department in which he is, the remarks that have been made.
Telegraph lines-construction of line from Athabasca Landing to Fort McMurray, $7,700.


Frank Oliver: 
Robert Rogers: In so far as the loop to which my hon. friend refers is concerned, there should be no difficulty in arranging that. I shall undertake to have it provided. My hon. friend's suggestion as to a double wire is not a bad one in this sense, that where you have a telegraph or telephone line and only the single wire, you have exactly the same expense for repairing and maintenance that you have for the double wire.


George Perry Graham: Do these Government
lines pay for themselves, or nearly so? I can understand that lines in not very thickly populated districts would hardly pay as well as lines where the population is more dense.


Robert Rogers: I do not think they pay their way, >and it could hardly be expected that they would do so. They are built in localities where a business company would not undertake to do work of this kind. For example, no business company would undertake the construction of the line to which my hon. friend from Edmonton has referred. It is a very necessary .and desirable work, however, and one that serves a worthy purpose. I do not think that the loss is very heavy, and there are certain localities in which these lines pay. They serve the country to a great extent by indirectly bringing in settlers.


George Perry Graham: Can the hon. Minister
of Railways (Mr. Cochrane) tell us if the communication or exchange of telegrams between the Marconi company and the land lines has been iquite satisfactory. I think we amended the Railway Act so as to give the Board of Railway Commissioners power to make rates in case there was friction. At one time it was said that the land lines made it difficult for the Marconi company to forward messages. Has any friction occurred?


Francis Cochrane: I have not heard any complaint at all in regard to it, and I have not paid much attention to it.
Riviere du Loup (Fraserville)-wharf improvements, $50,000.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: Can the hon. minister tell me if any dredging is to be done there

around the wharf or in the river leading up to the town?


Robert Rogers: There is a certain
amount of dredging to- be done there in connection with the contract.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: But none besides, not during the next summer for the deepening of the river that goes up to the town?


Robert Rogers: We have not been asked for.any up to date, as I understand.


George Perry Graham: Whose estimates do we take up to-night?


Robert Rogers: The Minister of Inland
Revenue. We are going to try to clean up the main estimates if we can, but on the distinct understanding that any discussion desired to be raised any day next week will be acceptable.


Rodolphe Lemieux: When are you going to take up immigration?


Robert Rogers: We have the supplementary estimates, and if the hon. gentleman wants to discuss anything on that, he may have the discussion on Monday or Tuesday.
At six o'clock, House resumed and then took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock, and .again went into Committee. (Mr. Deputy Speaker in the chair.)
Department of Inland Revenue-salaries, $114,050.


George Perry Graham: Who is the deputy minister?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: There is no deputy minister. Mr. Gerald has been superannuated since last October. The acting deputy minister is Mr. W. Himsworth. We expect to appoint a deputy shortly.


Edmond Proulx: When does the hon. minister expect to appoint a deputy minister? The office has been vacant for quite a long time.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: We expect to appoint one shortly.


George Perry Graham: It has been intimated that my hon. friend is keeping that office for one of the members of the House.


Robert Rogers: I think my hon. friend is mistaken. I have never heard -the name of any member of this House mentioned in connection with that.


Edmond Proulx: The name of the hon. member for i'lslet (Mr. Paquet) has been mentioned.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: No application has been received from any member of the House.
Mr. GAUVREAU.


George Perry Graham: When my hon. friend wants to make a promotion, how does he do it? That has to be done upon the recommendation of the deputy minister.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: The recommendations are made by the minister upon the advice of the acting deputy.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Mr. Chairman, will the Minister of Inland Revenue allow me to give him my opinion? He is looking for a deputy minister. Why, there is one already found. Mr. Laflamme, the present secretary of the Department, ought to be appointed to that important office. It is not necessary that I should praise him.
Mr. Laflamme is a French Canadian who has a fine record in journalism. As such he has met with great success in the New England States and in Canada.
From what I know, Mr. Laflamme would be fully qualified to act as deputy minister. I know that the appointment of French Canadians should be based on efficiency. I will not insist any more than I should upon the fact that, as a distinct race, we are entitled to a certain proportion in the Civil Service. Efficiency should be first of all taken into consideration. Other, considerations being equal, should we not happen to have among deputy ministers the representation to which we are strictly entitled, when there is a vacancy to which one of our own people might fairly have a claim, I would recommend this gentleman to the kind consideration of the Government.
I believe that should the hon. minister appoint Mr. Laflamme he would have an efficient and upright deputy minister. I take the liberty of recommending him.
Although I am not a believer in Mr. Laflamme's political views, I feel bound to admit that he would do credit to the office of deputy minister.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I thank the hon. member for Rouville for the good suggestion he makes in connection with the future deputy minister. Mr. Laflamme has been secretary of the department for over nineteen months. He certainly is a well qualified man and I shall take note of the hon. gentleman's recommendation.
Salaries of officers and inspectors of excise, and to provide for increases depending on the result of excise examinations, $551,807.
Mr. -OARVELL: There is an increase here of $43,000 which, compared with the $508,000 of the previous year, is an increase of eight per cent or nine per cent in the salaries. How is it that there is such an enormous increase depending on examinations?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: The number of officers
has been largely increased on account of the increase of revenue. These men will. | receive their regular increases after they pass their examinations.


George Perry Graham: How many are there?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: There are the inspectors
of the inland revenue districts and of all collectors, deputy collectors and excise officers. Their regular increase is statutory under excise regulations.


Edmond Proulx: I am told that there are some offices which should be closed because the revenue has largely decreased, and is exceeded by the expenses of the office.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I do not think my hon.
friend is well informed. The revenue has not decreased; on the contrary, it has increased generally.


Edmond Proulx: An officer has been appointed at Victoriaville, the former member for Drummond and Arthabaska, and I am told that he goes to his office only once a week.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I can cite a worse case than that. About four years ago it was decided to abolish the office of collector of inland revenue at Woodstock, for the simple reason that there was nothing for him to do. There was at one time some business in the collection of the revenue on liquors, but fortunately no liquors are now sold in the county of Carleton. The Scott Act has been enforced there for many years, no liquor is bought or sold, and consequently there was nothing for the officer to do. The predecessor of my hon. friend came to me some three years ago and said he would have to abolish the office. I begged as hard as I could for retention of the office; the officer was an old man seventy-six years of age and had served for something like thirty-five years. I agreed with him, however, that when that officer died there should be no further appointments made. By some means or other-I never knew the modus operandD-certain fees were paid by some of the officials to retain the bonded warehouse as a justification of the retention of the office. When the old official died, somewhere about eight or nine months before the late Government went out of power, I had plenty of friends who were willing to take upon themselves the burden of filling this office, because there was $300 a year attached to it, and nothing to do, but, according to the agreement I made with the former Minister of Inland Revenue, no appointment was made, and the office was abolished. I am satisfied that my hon. friend will find in his department records to show that that office was not to be filled. About two months after this Government came into power the position was filled and I am told that the appointee, a Mr. Brown, was given a salary of $400 a year. Mr. Brown was a good Tory worker, and he had to get something. He wanted the post office, but that had to be given to somebody else, and he was given the position of collector1 of excise at $400 a year. That was not bad enough,, for they have since appointed	another man as some kind of an inspector. He is a man named Clark, and he is getting $300. Of course he is a Tory. He is a very respectable old gentleman of seventy-five or seventy-six years of age. He does not do any harm, but I am just as sure he does not do any good. My hon. friend from Prescott (Mr. Proulx) thinks he has a bad case, but I think the case I have cited is a great deal worse than his. Two officials have been appointed since my hon. friend took office and they have nothing to do, and $700 is paid out to good Tory heelers. Perhaps my hon. friend will explain how this happened.


William Chisholm: The
minister seems to be rather slow in giving explanations. There is an increase m this item of $43,870 or about ten per cent. I think it is due to the House and to the country that the minister should give his reasons for the increase. The suggestion is made that it is owing to the fact that numerous office seekers have to he provided for, and that this is how provision is made. I found a case in a return which was brought down by the Minister of Inland Revenue.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Is that the case of Chisholm?


William Chisholm: Yes. I asked for a return of all the papers and documents in connection with the dismissal of Donald Chisholm and the appointment of his successor. I had inquired previously whether a successor had been appointed. When the former preventive officer was dismissed, there appeared to be no reason for his continued existence, and there seemed to have been no reason for his existence for many years before he was dismissed. When I asked for the information, the minister stated that he had dismissed Chisholm on representations made to him by persons whose statements he had reason to trust. He rather evaded the question, and did not give me much information. But I persisted in my inquiries, and in his kind good natured way he came and asked me what further information I wanted. After speaking to him, he kindly brought down certain papers and among them a memorandum dated Ottawa, February 10, 1912, relative to the dismissal of Donald Chisholm, temporary preventive offioer in the Pictou division. You will observe Mr. Chairman, that this man was only a temporary preventive officer. The memorandum says that Donald Chisholm was temporarily employed on 24th December, 1896. I may explain that about that time there was a certain amount of illicit distilling in some sections of the county and I in the adjoining county of Pictou, and it

was considered necessary that an officer should be appointed, and Chisholm was appointed. The officer who had held the appointment prior to 1896 removed from the district or died. When Mr. Donald Chisholm was appointed a number of people felt there was no necessity for the appointment of such officer, and he was appointed only temporarily. Though there was no real reason for his continuance in the office, in later years his services were retained, the explanation being just the same as that suggested by my hon. friend from Carleton (Mr. Carvell) in reference to the case in his county. Chisholm was a very respectable old gentleman, an honest conscientious fellow who was esteemed by everybody in the community in which he lived, and it was expected that in a short time the office would be done away with. The salary he received was only $200, and it was thought that perhaps his retention of the position would be a deterrent of any further distilling in the district. The memorandum brought down by the minister states that at the time of his dismissal he was seventy-two years of age. There are some men who at seventy-two are old in vigour, as well as in years, and some who are not. Let us suppose that this man who had to deal with moonshiners was really old. The suggestion is made that he should have been dismissed many years before, but his services were not dispensed with until 1st November, 1912. Let us see what his services consisted of. The memorandum sets forth that during sixteen years he took part in five seizures. The seizures were initiated by E. P. Fraser, the very efficient collector of customs in Pictou, who has jurisdiction over the whole eastern portion of Nova Scotia. Chisholm took part in five seizures, three in 1897 and two in 1896. The records of the department show that after 1897 he did no work whatever. The fact of the matter is that the curse of illicit distilling of whiskey disappeared shortly after Mr. E. P. Fraser initiated his crusade against it, and possibly the fact that Mr. Chisholm was a local man had a deterrent effect upon the moonshiners. However, being an old and very respectable gentleman, he was continued in office from year to year, although, as I have shown, there was really no necessity for his being kept in the position. When I read the minister's memorandum I thought that it was because a preventive officer was no longer required that his services had been dispensed wiffi, but to my amazement I found that tEe minister appointed a new man.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: A young man.


William Chisholm: He dismissed Chisholm because there was nothing to do.
Mr. CHISHOLM (Antigonish).


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Because he was doing nothing.


William Chisholm: Because there was nothing to do. No man, Grit or Tory, will venture the assertion that there has been any illicit distilling there in recent years. As a matter of fact, the criticism directed against the Liberal party and against myself in this connection was because this man was kept in office. It was said that we were simply keeping him there to provide a salary for a respectable old gentleman. The minister, and every officer in his department, knows that there was no necessity for this officer's services after 1897, but he has appointed a successor, and given him a salary of one hundred dollars more than the previous officer received, an increase of fifty per cent and he did this in the face of his own records. Where did my hon. friend get any justification for appointing a new officer? It was not because such an officer was needed. My hon. friend got his authority by appointing a food inspector. Think of it, a food inspector. A food inspector is needed there just as much as a newly born baby needs a beefsteak, to quote Gadsby, or a fifth wheel to a cart. I would like to know what food he has inspected since his appointment, or what food he will ever inspect. It is the most absurd thing. It would have been a perfectly proper thing for the minister to have dispensed with the services of Donald Chisholm when the present Government came into power. He expected that, and everybody else expected it, but the idea of appointing a successor to him is preposterous. It cannot be characterised as anything but a small steal out of the public treasury to provide for a man who is a good, active partisan. Why was this man appointed? Because he was a good active partisan, and for no other reason for no one can suspect him of having any qualification for a food inspector even if such were needed there. We have heard a great deal about men being dismissed for partisanship. Charity covers a multitude of sins it is said; but partisanship covers every excuse for needless dismissals and appointments. Charity cannot cover as wide a range as what is called partisanship. This thing covers everything discreditable to the present Government. It is illimitable in the extent to which it is worked. They bring this charge of partisanship against men who have given faithful service for the salaries they have received, and make it cover their sins of tyranny and injustice. This memorandum states that this man was 72 years old at the time of his dismissal, that he was appointed at a salary of $200, that his services were dispensed with on the 1st November, 1912, and that during the sixteen years he was employed, the records

^how that he took part in five seizures- three in 1897 and two in 1896. There seems to be no doubt at all that they had an ample excuse -for dismissing that man independently of any charge of partisanship. What is the explanation of it? The minister knew that this man, Donald Chisholm, should have been dismissed because his services were not required, but they wanted to find a place for this other man, Moses Delorey, who was recognized as an active political heeler, a man who, in season and out of season, had been engaged in active political work. Yet the minister appoints that man, knowing his record as an active partisan. Will he be removed from his present office on account of partisanship? No, he will not be. Recognizing that there was no need to appoint any person to this office, they said: We will have to get rid of this man on some other ground, not because he is too old, not because he is not needed, but we will have to specify something else, and therefore we find in this memorandum:
His removal was caused by political partisanship as will be seen by copies of affidavits attached.
Who gave that evidence? Has the minister any conscience at all?


The CHAIRMAN:: Order.


William Chisholm: If I am out of order, Mr. Chairman, I will withdraw that and ask what kind of a conscience he has. We expect something from him. All you have to do is to look at him. You will see an honest countenance; you will see a man who will not be disposed to allow the public treasury to be looted.
Mr. GRAHAM Or diluted.


William Chisholm: You will see a man who in a person embodies the virtues of good nature and honesty. That is why I appeal to him particularly. Of course, if it were the hon. Minister'of Public Works (Mr. Rogers) or the hon. Postmaster General (Mr. Pelletier) it "would be different; they are men who are out for political scalps they are playing the game, all the time. They care not, they are bold, they are brazen, and they will defy public opinion afterwards. The Minister of Inland Revenue will not do that; he is seemingly honest, frank and sincere. I find that on March 21, 1912, in answer to some questions that I put to the minister, ' Hansard,' page 5819, the minister laid d-own this rule:
If a member states that he is aware of his own personal knowledge than an officer has been guilty of offensive partisanship, we shall probably decide to dismiss him without investigation.
This is a careful minister; he is not too bold. He says that we shall probably dismiss him without further investigation Then he says further:
If the charge is by the member on his own personal knowledge we will act on it

Quite properly too.
If it is by the defeated candidate, who gives sufficient facts and proofs, affidavits and so forth, to convince me that there is reason to act and dismiss, I will dismiss; and each case will be decided on its merits.
Not on political expediency. I want to admit that in so far as I am concerned I never recommended the dismissal of that man, Donald Chisholm. I must plead guilty to the fact that I should have recommended his dismissal some years ago. But the circumstances were extenuating; he was an old man, he was very much respected in the community, his home was open to everybody who travelled through that section of the country, and I never had the heart to recommend his dismissal in his old age. True, in so far as his services were concerned, they could have been dispensed with years ago as there was nothing for him to do. But now the minister dismisses him, turns around and appoints another man in his place and gives this other man an extra salary by stating that he is a food inspector. How many government food inspectors are there in the province of Nova Scotia? What are their duties, and how long are they to be retained? These are questions that I would like to have the minister answer.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Does the hon. gentleman mean preventive officers or food inspectors?


William Chisholm: I am speaking of pre-ventitive officers who are salved by the title of food inspectors, preventive officers who are absolutely unnecessary, whose duties ceased long ago, and who, upon being appointed, are given an extra salary of $100 under the excuse that they are to act as food inspectors. What are the duties of these food inspectors? The memorandum says:
Mr. Chisholm was replaced by Mr. Delorey who was appointed preventive officer and inspector of food, from the 12th December, 1912, for which he is receiving $200 as preventive officer and $100 as food inspector.
I wish, Mr. Chairman, to draw your attention to the fact that this appointment was made a short time previous to the local bye-election in the county of Anti-gonish, but the appointment was concealed from the public until after the election was over and until I made inquiry in this House, by reason of the fact that the Conservative machine down there had to use this office and many other offices to try to bait the people along. They not only instituted a system of terrorism in that constituency as to existing officials

but they tried to give the people to understand that there were new offices to be filled and they promised one of these new offices to every man whom they thought to be doubtful. This man, Moses Delorey, was not doubtful, but he was somewhat disgruntled. He had worked long and faithfully for the Conservative party, he had done good work and they rewarded him by giving him this office of preventive officer at a salary of $200 with $100 extra as food inspector. Will the minister tell me why he appointed a food inspector down there, and why, if he was going to make the appointment, he did not make it at some place where such an officer might be of some use. Why was he not appointed in the shire town where there are butcher stalls and where meat and other kinds of food are being exposed for sale? Instead of that, he appointed him in-a very fine district-I have not a word to say against it-but in a district where there is no particular business done.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I am really at a loss to know why the hon. member for Antigonish takes so much interest in the fate of that Mr. Chisholm. I do not know if he is a relation of his, but any way he is greatly interested in him. At all events, I have judged proper to dismiss Mr. Chisholm, because complaints have been made against him.


William Chisholm: I will explain to you now; that he is not. The only relative I have had in the Government service was a brother who was the station master an Heatherton on the Intercolonial railway and he was the only station master from Halifax to Montreal who was dismissed. His offence was that he voted for his only brother. He was quite satisfied to take his medicine if that rule was to be applied and the principle was to be laid down that to the victors belong the spoil, but it is rather a significant circumstance, and rather a reflection upon the man who recommended the dismissal, as well as upon the Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Cochrane), that the only man singled out for such treatment was the brother of a member. The father of the man who recommended that dismissal, the father of Senator Girroir, was postmaster for many years in Antigonish county, and I was -asked to dismiss him, but I said no, I will never be guilty of doing such a mean, contemptible thing.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: In any case, Mr. Chisholm was a temporary employee since December 24, 1896, as a preventive officer. He was an old man whose only occupation was to draw his salary.
When I was asked to dismiss him, he was accused of having taken an active part in the last election. Mr. Girroir has declared Mr. CHISHOLM (Antigonish).
th-at himself in a personal letter which runs as follows:
I have personal knowledge that Mr. iChis-holm at each election spent considerable time in visiting his friends with w-hom -he had influence in canvassing them to vote for the Liberal candidate. He has always been outspoken in the Liberal cause and even meet-*, ings of the organization have been held at his house. He was, during the last election, a member of the Liberal organization committee for the polling district of Tracadie. I would recommend that 'Mr. Moses Delorty be appointed.


William Chisholm: Are you reading from a letter of Mr. Girroir?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Yes.
On receiving that letter I asked the deputy minister for a report. I have received that report in which it is stated that Mr. Chisholm had been really a preventive officer since December 24, 1896, and that from that date up to 1911 he had done nothing else but drawing his salary of $200 a year. I have thought proper to dismiss him, giving as my reasons that he had not shown enough activity in the fulfillment of his duties. A long while after that, I was asked to appoint a new preventive officer, and I have appointed Mr. Delorey, and I gave him at the same time the charge of food inspector.
If Mr. Delorey does not show more activity than did Mr. Chisholm, his predecessor, I will dismiss him, on the necessary proofs.


Georges Henri Boivin: Why have you increased his salary?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Because we have given
him a new employment, that of food inspector, -and I may assure you that is no sinecure. That inspector is under the control of the analyst who often asks him for samples of foods which the inspector must send to the analyst's office. We are thus in a position to administer the law concerning the adulteration of food.
For that other function, I have given him an additional salary of $100 a year.


William Chisholm: 
George Perry Graham: Has the minister nothing to say to the charge that he did not bring down the full return to the House? Why, that constitutes a contempt of Parliament.
' Mr. NANTEL:	There were contained in
that report all the documents which were on file at the department. Mr. Girroir's letter was private and confidential. I have not seen fit to produce it, and I don't believe I am obliged to do it, because it is a personal affair. But I have given communication of it to the hon. member.


George Perry Graham: If it is a personal and
private letter it has no business to be read in the House.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: And the minister has no business dismissing a man on a personal letter.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: It was not on the regular file.


George Perry Graham: The minister has read a private and confidential letter to the House and that letter must go on the official record.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I have no objection.


George Perry Graham: The minister does not
appear to realize the situation; if he does he has been guilty of contempt of an order of the House.


William Chisholm: Report
him to the Governor General.


George Perry Graham: The House ordered that this complete return should be brought down and the minister brought down the return on his responsibility, and it is not a complete return, and the Prime Minister should ask for his resignation.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: The report I have submitted to the House comprised all the documents which were in the possession of the deputy minister.


William Chisholm: What is the date of Mr. Girroir's letter?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: The 27th June. Later on my hon. friend (Mr. Chisholm) asked me for some information. I am quite sure that I have given a copy of that letter. That I do not positively recollect, but I am sure I gave him the contents of that letter.


William Chisholm: I will
explain that. The minister may be in good faith; he is in good faith in making that statement, and he probably believes it. But this is the explanation; when I moved for the papers in the House and they were brought down, the papers did not contain all the details that I required. The papers did not make any reference to Senator Girroir. By reference to ' Hansard ' you will find that I asked on whose recommendation Donald Chisholm had been dismissed, and the minister replied on representations made to him verbally and on affidavits he had received. When I put the further question by whom these recommendations were made the minister refused to give me that information, or at all events gave me what I considered an unsatisfactory answer. Then I raised a question of privilege and I complained the minister was not giving the information he was required to give, even to an humble back-bencher if you wish to call me so. The minister then came over to me and said: What further information are you asking; what are you complaining about. I said:	I want to know
from you who was it gave you the oral information, and what is the nature of it, and the minister said: Mr. Girroir told me certain things. I said: Are these in writing, and the minister said, no.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Did I not send you a copy of that letter?


William Chisholm: The minister did not send me a copy of the letter, and the minister stated to me that the representations made to him by Senator Girroir were oral, and that is precisely why I brought the matter up to-night to see if I could not entrap the minister and get the facts. All the minister has to do is to look up ' Hansard,' and he will see that my statement is correct.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I will look into the matter.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, that there is no member of this House who would like to be more liberal to the feelings or prejudices of any member of this House than I am. I am proud of the fact that hon. members who speak the French language are privileged to speak that language in the House. I take pride in , the fact that hon. members

in this House speak the French language and have the privilege of expressing their views .in that language. I protest that it is receiving money under false pretenses for a minister of the Crown to be holding a portfolio of the Crown and to refuse to answer an English-speaking member in a language that he can understand. The hon. minister can speak the English language. I am an English-speaking member, who is under the disability of not being able to understand the French language. I must, therefore, put up with that disability when an hon. member is speaking in French; but, when a minister of the Crown, who is discharging the responsibilities of his office, is speaking to me in this House, I have a right to be addressed in a language that I can understand. I protest that, when the right hon. gentleman who leads this House selected his Nationalists, he selected Nationalists who evidently cannot speak the English language or who decline to show the courtesy of speaking to English-speaking members in a language that they can understand and of giving them the opportunity of criticising if necessary their conduct. I make this protest, not in the slightest heat, and with every respect to the rights of hon. gentlemen to speak the beautiful French language which I regret exceedingly I cannot speak or understand. I submit, if a French member addresses an English minister in this House and if that English minister can speak French, that he is not treating the French member properly, if the latter cannot speak English, if he addresses him in a language that he cannot understand.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I protest against the hon. gentleman's protest. Both languages are official. I have the right to speak ip French to my hon. friend. If he does not understand French, that is not my fault. I have the right to speak French in this House as much as any other hon. member has the right to speak English to a French member who is not supposed to understand English. When a French member from Quebec is obliged to express himself in French to an English member of the Cabinet who does not understand French, nobody complains. I have a perfect right to do the same. I protest against your own protest.


Georges Henri Boivin: I am very pleased with
the result of the protest made by the hon. member for North Cape Breton (Mr. McKenzie). It at least shows the Opposition and the members of this House that the hon. Minister of Inland Revenue can, when he desires to do so, speak the English language and speak it very fluently. As a matter of right, I would be the last man in this House of Commons to say that a member has not the right to speak the French language. It is a right which is very sacred, Mr. McKenzie.
a right of which we Freneh-Ganadians are very proud and very jealous; but I certainly do not think that the hon. Minister of Inland Revenue was justified in giving the answer he did to the hon. member (Mr. McKenzie), especially after the example which was set for him by the right hon. the leader of the Government. Upon several occasions the right hon. the Prime Minister, who certainly does not speak French better than the hon. member speaks English, has been addressed by hon. members on this side of the House in the. French language and very courteously has answered them in that language. I think that the hon. minister misunderstood what he calls our protest. We are not speaking about the question of right whatever; we are speaking of a question of courtesy; and, as he is able to speak the English language so fluently, I think it would be very much better for every one concerned if the deliberations in committee were carried on in English, and if he would show the English-speaking members the same courtesy that the Prime Minister has on several occasions shown to French speaking members on this side of the House.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I did not speak French as a lack of courtesy to the hon. member for Antieonish (Mr. Chisholm). I spoke the French language because it was easier for me to'do so. I regret very much not being as conversant with the English language as my hon. friend is.


William Chisholm: That ia not the point. The hon. member for Cape Breton is referring to the constitutional right and duty of a Cabinet Minister to speak in either language when he is able to speak in both languages. A minister should speak in the language in which he is addressed when he has command of both tongues.


Robert Rogers: I do not think my hon. friend the Minister of Inland Revenue had any thought or intention of showing discourtesy to the hon. member for Antigonish (Mr. Chisholm) when he undertook to answer his questions in his mother tongue. All hon. members know that the French and the English languages are the official languages of this House. I was pleased to note that, when my hon. friend the Minister of Inland Revenue answered my hon. friend from Antigonish in French, the latter apparently perfectly understood the hon. minister, and was able to make answer in the manner in which he did, so that I do not think that any injustice has been done or any attempt been made on the part of hon. gentlemen to show any sign of discourtesy. I trust that hon. members opposite will understand that no discourtesy was intended. We have had a very pleasant and useful day in carrying on the pub-

lie business. I hope * it will be continued for the balance of the evening. I want to congratulate the hon. member for Antigonish on his knowledge and understanding of the French language.


William Chisholm: I am
sorry that not only my modesty but my ignorance prevents me from accepting the compliments paid to me by -the acting leader of the Government (Mr. Rogers). I regret to say that I do not understand French, although I can read it rather indifferently. In this case I had the benefit of an interpreter.
I want to direct the hon. Minister of Inland Revenue to page 440 of the Votes and Proceedings where he will find that an order was passed on January 29, for a copy of all letters, correspondence on file referring to the dismissal of Donald Chisholm, of Tra-cadie, in the county of Antigonish, as preventive officer. I ask him to look at the papers that were brought down; and I ask him if, in that light, he realizes his position in failing to respond to that Order of the House.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: When the returns were
prepared by the deputy minister, the letter of Senator Girroir was not on the official file. When my attention was called to the fact by the hon. member for Antigonish, if I remember rightly, I asked him if he wanted that letter. I gave him the information and I am quite sure that I gave instructions to furnish him with that letter.


William Chisholm: I have not got it.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I will verify that. I am quite sure that I gave instructions to furnish my hon. friend with the letter. That letter was in my private file; but it is not marked private, and I gave instructions to my officer to send it to my hon. friend. I am quite sure that the letter was addressed to him. Have you received that letter?


William Chisholm: I did not receive the letter, so far as my memory serves me. In the conversation which I had with the Minister of Inland Revenue, he told me that Senator Girroir had made his representations orally. I had reason to believe that Mr. Girroir was at the bottom of this, and that is why I asked for the correspondence. What I object to is this, that the letter, which was not marked private had not been brought down with the other papers. There is1 no such letter on my file and I think I am pretty careful about keeping my papers together. But I would not contradict the minister when he says he sent it, for there are two of us by the same name, members in this House, and our letters sometimes go to the wrong man. Letters intended for the member for Inverness come to me and vice versa. Why was it not on file? What
kind of administration have we In this country? What confidence can the people have in the way affairs are administered when letters are left off these files as a mere matter of choice? This is not public business at all; it is secret, dangerous business that is going on.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Now that the minister has shown that he can talk fluently in either language, I would like him to answer in French or in English, I do not care. What is the use of making appointments in my town if the services of these officers are not required?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: What appointments?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: The two appointments
I spoke of, one at $300 and one at $400. What is the use, when there is nothing for these officers to do? One is Mr. Brown and the other is Mr. Clarke.


Mr. CLARK (Red Deer):: 
Robert Rogers: I join with the hon.
member for Red Deer, but I think that he has not gone far enough. The hon. member for Carleton said that not only was there no illicit manufacture of liquor, but he went further and said that there was no sale or use of it.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: We do not know what illicit distillation means down there. No officer was ever appointed in New Brunswick for the purpose of keeping that down. The duty of the officer at one time was when the liquor was manufactured to put 't in the bonded warehouse and receive the duty on it.


Georges Henri Boivin: I desire information concerning the appointment of the officer re-

ferred to by the hon. member for Prescott (Mr. Proulx) a few moments ago, Mr. Gilbert, of Arthabaska. When was he appointed, what are his duties, and what is his salary?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Mr. Gilbert is collector of inland revenue for Drummond and Arthabaska; his salary is $600, and he was appointed to Teplace Mr. Poirier.


Edmond Proulx: What is the revenue of the office?	_


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I am not in a position to give that information to-night, but will make a note of the point and give it later.


Georges Henri Boivin: Another bit of information, I should like to get is, whether this Mr. Gilbert is the same Mr. Gilbert, who was Nationalist candidate in the Drummond and Arthabaska byt-election in 1910. That was a very important by-election in the province of Quebec, in fact the minister said he changed his opinion at the time of that election. Since that date, and especially in the past few months, some members have gone so far as to say that there was a chance of an alliance between the Nationalists and the Liberals. Are we to understand that this Nationalist candidate in Drummond and Arthabaska has been appointed to office by this Government?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Mr. Gilbert is the same man. I made a mistake in saying that his salary is $600; I have ascertained that his salary is $800.


Edmond Proulx: How often does he go to his office? I am told that he resides quite a distance from Vietoriaville, on his farm, and goes to his office very infrequently.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I am told that Mr. Gilbert keeps his office well. I have never received any complaint concerning him.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: I have personal
knowledge of the facts, because I was living there for quite a while. Mr. Gilbert is farming on his farm at Stanford. He goes to the office when he is telephoned for.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: This is the first complaint I have received concerning this officer. I will make a note of it, and if there is any irregularity I will try toi remedy it.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: I do not complain
of it, so long as those who are in need of Mr. Gilbert do not complain.


Edmond Proulx: I am told there are
quite a few offices that should be closed, the revenue not being sufficient to pay the expenses of the office. I have been told that this is that kind of an office.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I am informed that Mr. Gilbert makes his return very regularly to his chief, Mr. Benoit.
Mr. BOTVIN.	'


William F. Carroll: Have there been any
increases recently in the salaries of inland revenue officers in the city of Halifax?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I am not aware of any.


William F. Carroll: I desire to bring to the attention of the minister the case of Mr. Patrick Tompkins, who has been an officer of the department in the city of Halifax for the past twenty-five years. He happens to be a close personal friend of my own, but a political friend of the minister. A good many years before 1896, he was appointed to office by the Conservative Government. He was a strong Conservative then, and is the same to-day. He has been a most efficient officer. He has succeeded in capturing many of these distilleries that they have in the eastern part of Nova Scotia, and has done much to stamp out that business. Personally, I tried to get an increase in his salary from the late Government, but did not succeed. As a matter of fact, Mr. Tompkins came near being dismissed from office at one time on account of his political complexion. I do not care what his politics may be, he has been in the service a long time, and has always fulfilled his duty faithfully and well. He should receive more than his present salary, which, J. think, is $800 a year.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not know anything
about Mr. Tompkins' qualification. I really was not aware of his political opinions, but I have known him a long time, and I have believed him to be a very faithful and efficient officer. I remember years ago that I had occasion to note the .manner in which he performed his duties, and I entirely agree with what my hon. friend says as to his efficiency and devotion to duty.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Patrick Tompkins, third-class exciseman, was appointed on August 14, 1879. He his now receiving a salary of' $1,000, which is the maximum he is entitled to receive, because he has never passed an examination. I must say that the salaries of all these officials are certainly small, and I have thought of increasing them.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I am .glad that the
minister intends to increase the salaries of these officials. I do not know exactly whether he has made any increase in the salary of his official in the prosperous and growing town of Sydney. In Sydney, living is just as expensive as it is in Montreal or Toronto. When the late Government was in power, I was trying to get an increase in salary of this official, Mr. Macdonald by name, but I did not succeed in getting anything for him. I hope that my hon. friend the minister has done some-
115ao

thing for him, or has some intention of increasing his salary. I think he is receiving about $800, entirely too small a salary for anyone living in Sydney.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: I have only one word to say. I would like to know from the hon. minister why Mr. Martin, of St. Arsene, has been dismissed and who has been appointed to take his place?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: What is his name?


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: Elie Martin.
While the deputy minister is looking over his papers, in order to enable the minister to answer my question, I will ask him if he knows that at Riviere du Loup prohibition prevails, the dry regime is in force and there are no more licenses to sell liquor, wholesale or retail? I therefore warn the hon. minister that the man they have appointed, Mr. Frenette, has no revenue at all, although he is a married man and the father of a family. The salary he is receiving is pitiable. What I blame the Government for is that they have divided the office of collector, held by one Mr. Pelletier, an office which gave a man a decent living, but is not enough for two. Having divided it in two you simply have two men starving.
Although Mr. Frenette is one of my political opponents, I will readily give him the credit of -being an honest man, and I feel it my duty to ask the minister if, under the circumstances, he could not find somewhere else for him a position that would give enough to live upon. I am against dismissals, especially when women are the victims, and I am -always ready to help those who are in -want and who properly fulfil their duties. I believe the hon. minister is well disposed, so that I shall ask him whether he could not give Mr. Frinette another position with a proper salary that would enable him to earn his living.


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: That is very well
spoken.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: As to Mr. Frenette, his
salary must be provided for, that is evident under the circumstances, because the position he is now occupying at Rivifere du Loup is a sinecure which brings him nothing. He will have to be transferred somewhere else, into another division, because there is nothing for him to do where he is.
As to Mr. Elie Martin, of St. Arsene, I have not the information just now to give an -answer to the hon. -member.


Georges Henri Boivin: Can the hon. minister give us the name of the officer of his department in the city -of F-amham, which is situated in the Bedford division?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Have you his name?


Georges Henri Boivin: I have not his name. I believe he took the place of a Mr. Porte-lance.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Is he a preventive officer?


Georges Henri Boivin: No, I believe he is collector of excise, because there is a cigar factory in Farnham.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: We have several officers
who are only temporary. I have not at the present moment the information required 'by my hon. friend. I am making a note of this and I will give it later on.
Adulteration of f-oo-d and the administration of the Act respecting fertilizers, -fraudulent marking and commercial feeding stuffs, $30,000.


Georges Henri Boivin: Before this item is adopted, can the hon. minister tell me who is the food inspector in -the Bedford district?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I may say that all the
revenue officers are inspectors, according to-law but the chief inspector of that district lives in Montreal. As I just said, it is the duty of the revenue officers to see that this law is properly carried out.


Georges Henri Boivin: Will the hon. minister tell me what is the salary paid to Mr. Van Antwerp, who is at the same time excise and weights and measures officer, whether he is a permanent officer or only working temporarily?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I am taking note of this.


Georges Henri Boivin: Are all the food inspectors living in Montreal, and are they sent from there to all parts of the province?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: No. The province is
separated into divisions and a certain number of inspectors reside in these respective districts.


William Chisholm: Can the hon. minister tell me how many food inspectors there are in Nova Scotia, giving the number in each county if possible?


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: I will get the information for my hon. friend.	.


Georges Henri Boivin: How many divisions are
there -and how many inspectors? The hon. minister might give me that information on supplementary estimates.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Yes.


William Chisholm: Am I to understand that the minister will furnish the information later on ? If so, I would ask him to give the date of appointment of each of those food inspectors, and the names and addresses of the parties appointed.
Miscellaneous-distribution of parliamentary documents, $1,500.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Might I draw the attention of the leader of the House to a

question which has been put to me by several members? The distribution of parliamentary documents is made during the session in a very fair manner by the distributing officer, but several members would like to receive documents after the session is over. They have called at Mr. Davidson's office and have been informed that he would distribute the documents between sessions with pleasure, but that he does not enjoy the franking privilege after the session is over. It seems to me that when members require blue-books or other parliamentary documents, the franking privilege ought to be given to the distributing officer, so that those members who live at a distance could receive them after the session. Mr. Davidson says he is obliged to pay for the stamps necessary to send those documents. Perhaps the Postmaster General will take a note of that.


Robert Rogers: I do not know what my hon. friend's request would amount to. I have not heard of it before, but the matter will be taken up and considered. If it is simply a question of franking in sending out certain material, I do not think it would be very serious. Of course, there have been times when it appeared to the post office authorities that the franking privilege was being very much abused, and they naturally have to curtail the privilege as much as possible. However, this matter will be looked into, and if it is possible to meet the suggestion of my hon. friend, something will be done.


Georges Henri Boivin: I would like to say a word concerning the distribution of blue-books during the session. In previous years we had a room called the ' blue book room,' where the blue books for the different members were left, and where they could be called for at any time, used in the members' rooms, or sent to their homes. I understand that that blue book room has been abolished, and the result is that during the present session we have had blue books piled on our desks and tables in the different rooms without knowing where they came from, or whether we had already got them or not. In certain instances several important reports have not pome to us at all, while we have been overwhelmed with other blue books for which we have no use. I think that the blue book room was a great convenience to all the members, and I regret very much that it has been abolished. Would it not be possible to have something of the same nature in use next year ?


Robert Rogers: Of course the Government are very anxious to provide hon. members with every facility in regard to obtaining all the information and all the books that are printed from time to time, Mr. LEMIEUX.
and if there is any mistake, or any delay, we will certainly be,' glad to remedy it.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Whilst we are on this subject I would like to call the attention of the French-speaking ministers to something which is not new, but which I hope will not happen again in view of the nomination made recently of ten new translators. To give an instance of the poor service we have had in the distribution of public documents or blue books, I may say that we have received only this, month the Auditor General's report in French for 1911-12. I understand that a radical change is about to take place, the Speaker and Deputy Speaker having arranged to appoint new translators, who, I am told, are all very competent. They have passed a Civil Service examination, and I understand they are to be appointed shortly. I hope that in the future we shall have the French blue books within a reasonable time.


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: That is one of the
reasons why the Speaker and the Committee of Internal Economy have come to the conclusion that instead of having the translations done all over the country, and the work consequently delayed, these new translators should be appointed to take care of the work. As the hon. member has said, I think we can rely on the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker to see to it that these translations are made within a reasonable time.


Edmond Proulx: Have these translators
been appointed in order of merit?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: They have been appointed by the Speaker, with the concurrence of the Committee of Internal Economy.


Edmond Proulx: An examination was
held?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: Yes.


Edmond Proulx: I understand that no age limit was fixed before the examination was held. Candidates were invited to come to Ottawa to pass an examination, but, after the examination had been held, the commission fixed an age limit at forty years, I think, and some of the candidates who were over forty years of age, were among the first ten in the list of those who passed. I know one candidate who took fifth place, but he did not get an appointment because he was over the age limit.


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: The translators appointed were recommended by the commission.


Edmond Proulx: What I find fault with
was that the age limit was fixed before instead of after the examination.


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: If my hon. friend
finds fault with the commission, there are probably a good many people who will agree with him.


Edmond Proulx: I am told that these
appointments were made not by the Civil Service Commission, but by the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker, and the Committee of Internal Economy, and that they, and not the Civil Service Commission, fixed the age limit.


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: The Committee of
Internal Economy do not fix the age limit They make the appointments, but like the various departments of the Government, they have to take the recommendations of the Civil Service Commission. We have two commissioners. Sometimes they agree, and sometimes they do not. When they do agree, they make recommendations to the departments, and the appointments go through by Order in Council. In the present case, the appointments have been made by the Speaker with the concurrence of the Committee of Internal Economy.


Edmond Proulx: The candidates in that
examination had to pay a fee of $8. Will the fee be remitted to those who succeeded in passing the examination, but who could not be appointed because they were over forty years of age?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: I cannot tell my hon. friend that, but I might inquire and let him know.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: Before the item relating to the distribution of blue books is passed, I would suggest to the leader of the House that the whole system of distribution be reorganized. I would suggest, not another blue book room, but a proper organization of the present room. It is a common thing for members to go to the distribution office, and to be told they cannot get the book they ask for. The messenger has to search in various offices around the city to find small publications issued by the departments of the Government. Sometimes he comes back after a long search without the documents required, and sometimes we are told that these documents can be obtained at the King's Printer's office or at other places. I see no reason why a distribution office should not be so organized that every publication of the Government would be available to every member on application. I would suggest that the Government look into the question with the view of reorganizing the system and of placing it under proper management, so that when members ask for any publication of the Government at the distribution office, the officers m charge would be able to find it.


Robert Rogers: The statement made by my hon. friend is a serious one. If any
officer in the employ of the Government has been guilty of refusing to give consideration to members-


John Howard Sinclair: I am not suggesting that anyone has been guilty of that. I say that the distribution room is not furnished with all the publications of the Government. I think the officers in the distribution room are very efficient; they do everything they can to find publications required by members. But the system is such, that a good many publications are not under the control of the distribution staff at all.


Robert Rogers: If the statement of my
hon. friend is correct, the matter should certainly be looked into, and we will endeavour to do so with the view of rectifying any grievance that may exist. The room to which he refers should be supplied with every blue book and Government publication. I will take note of the matter and endeavour to see that it is put right.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I wish to make a simple request to the leader of the House. Would it not be possible in future for members to obtain a few more copies of ' Hansard ' than they get now? Each member gets three copies, but 1 would be very glad to get more. The expense of printing a few more copies would not amount to very much.


Robert Rogers: The question of the number of copies of ' Hansard ' available to members is entirely in the hands of thet Debates Committee. They have the matter in hand, and as my hon. friend well knows, it has been the practice for a very long time to allow only so many copies to each member. So far as I understand the question from the information I have, it might be a good thing for the public business of this country if we had less ' Hansard ' than we have.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Robert Rogers: However, I might be mistaken in that. At the same time, the matter of which my hon. friend complains is entirely in the hands of the Debates Committee, and I have no doubt they will take a note of what he has said, and if they choose to find a remedy there will be no objection on this side of the House.


William Findlay Maclean: I
would suggest that the Debates Committee take into consideration the advisability of abolishing ' Hansard.'


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I quite agree with the statement made by my hon. friend from North Cape Breton. I do not think that the Minister of Public Works ought to grumble at the number of ' Hansards ' so much as at the fact that there is a ' Hansard ' at all. If he could get rid of ' Hansard ' entirely,

there might be something in his argument, but seeing that it exists, I do not see that it makes very much difference whether the number given to each member is three or six. This matter has come up a good many times, and I could never understand why the number should be restricted. But there seems to be a desire on the part of the Debates Committee to restrict the number of unrevised ' Hansards ' given to each member; for what reason I do not know, unless it be that ' Hansard ' is not perfect. But a member should be held responsible for what he says in the House, and I do not think he ought to be allowed to change ' Hansard ' to any great extent. I think the ' Hansard ' reports as a rule are pretty accurate, and I do not see why members should not have a reasonable number of co'pies, if they want them, to send to their constituents. Personally I would like to have more than three copies, and I think I am voicing the sentiment of many members on both sides of the House in saying so.


George Perry Graham: I do not send ' Hansard to my constituents, but I have been surprised at the number of requests for copies from people all over Canada. It has cost me probably $50 this session to send copies.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: I would like to suggest to the minister that when he is looking into this matter he should try to find some means of avoiding the printing of so many parliamentary documents that none of the members want. They are piled on the desks and tables, and it has seemed to me that there was a great waste that might be avoided. I would .suggest that he deivse some system of supplying the documents that people generally want and that are not too heavy.


Robert Rogers: As my hon. friend can understand, it is very difficult for the officers who have matters of this kind in charge to decide what documents are more useful, acceptable, or desirable, than others. It would be very difficult for those officers to say that only a certain number of copies of a certain document should be printed, and that h certain number of another document should not be printed, though I presume they have some kind of rule which they follow in matters of that kind. I can quite understand that certain documents are not being made use of by members of the House, and that they accumulate and become practically useless. J do not know that that can be remedied, but it is a point that might well be con .sidered by those who have the matter in charge. It will be brought to their notice, and some saving might be made in the direction suggested.


John Howard Sinclair: The matter might be arranged by a circular form of application sent to each member to be returned to the Mr. CiRMEiLL.
distribution office asking for such blue books as he would want. Then the Government would only be required to supply a certain number. There are a number of blue books that I do not want at all, they are a nuisance to me and I cannot find room for them, while there are others that I would like to get more of.
Mr. (STANFIELD:	The printing committee at the last meeting took that matter up, and they are trying to provide some means whereby useless blue books shall not be sent to members.


John Howard Sinclair: I think it might be
worked out in that way. I would like a few more copies of some blue books and the cost would not be any more to the Government to give me what I need. There are certain blue books that are of interest to the people of my constituency, and others which are not required at all. I think we should have a chance to make some choice.


Georges Henri Boivin: I think the difficulty
could be very easily gotten over if the distribution office upstairs were enlarged and if instead of the books being sent around to different members, as they are at the * present time, whether we want them or not, these reports were left in the blue book office to be called for by the members as required, at the end of the session. The officers of the different departments would very soon see how many books of each kind would be required, they could govern themselves accordingly in future years, and there would be a saving to the country in future. It would be much more satisfactory because there are a number of blue books that many members do not look at, and there are others of which they would like to have more than a limited supply.


Robert Rogers: That rulte might isuit
certain hon. gentlemen, but take for example the hon. member for South Renfrew (Mr. Graham)-do you suggest that he would take the trouble to go around to the distribution office for a blue-book and take it with him?


Georges Henri Boivin: It is not necessary to go around; all you have to do is to ring for a messenger.


Robert Rogers: However, there might be some advantage in the suggestion.
Public Archives-formerly voted under Art, Agriculture and Statistics, $35,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I would like to ask my hon. friend the Postmaster General (Mr. Pelletier) if the Government has considered the succession to the late Mr. Roy, who for so many years was one of the archivists, one of the most distinguished men

of letters this country has produced, and who died a few weks ago. The other day, while I was attending the sittings of the Royal Society, they were discussing the question of a successor to Mr. Roy. I understand that a recommendation is generally made by the Committee on Archives. I hope the successor to Mr. Roy will be selected for his ability and not for his party affiliations. I will recall to my hon. friend that Mr. Roy was appointed by a Liberal government because he was a most competent man for that very important position. I know that if somebody has the ability in the Conservative party the position goes of right to him, but the Government should find the best man and give it to him. It is very important that Mr. Roy should be succeeded by a man of the highest ability. You may find somebody to succeed him but nobody to replace him.


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: Whilst I have no
authority to speak on the question, as the matter is in the Department of the Secretary of State, I acknowledge that what the hon. member for Rouville (Mr. Lemieux) has said is perfectly true. The late, esteemed Mr. Roy had been a Conservative but he was appointed on account of his very great ability. Now that he is gone I can give my hon. friend the assurance that the appointment would be made with the same idea and the same end in view. Without giving any names for the moment, I may say that one gentleman who has been recommended, and highly recommended, by a very great many of the most influential men outside of politics will very likely get the appointment.


Frank Oliver: Has the amount of the
vote for the Archives been increased over what it was last year?


Robert Rogers: I understand from the
officer in charge that it is the same amount as last year.	'[DOT]
Salaries and expenses of the Paris agency, $13,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Mr. Chairman, I am
glad to find that the salary of our represen-tive in Paris has been increased. The hon. Mr. Roy, I am happy to give him that testimony, does credit to Canada. We must bear in mind the fact that Paris is the leading salon of Europe. But, Mr. Chairman, while approving the increase of the hon. Mr. Roy's salary, I deeply regret that the widow of our former commissioner, the late Mr. Fabre, has remained in circumstances which are nearly akin to dire straits.
Mr. Fabre had been one of the ,most prominent men of our race. For a long time he has wielded a clever and alert ped in the service of Canada. As a literary man he certainly ranked among the best. His
hand and purse were always widely opened to greet our countrymen who come to his door asking for help. His kindly heart made it impossible for him to get accustomed to the sufferings of others. I have gathered a whole lot 0i evidence which I might read to the House and which show that the lamented Mr. Fabre gave without reckoning to send back to Canada, for instance, Canadians wrho had been stranded in France. His banker gives on this subject particulars which are very touching. In short, with but a poor salary, and through excessive generosity this good man left his widow, if not in straitened circumstances, at least in circumstances which are not becoming to her position.
I asked the Government to remember the services rendered to the country by the lamented Mr. Fabre at a time when, so to speak, he had to reveal Canada to its old Mother Country. With his speeches and with his pen, instruments which he wielded wonderfully well, Mr. Fabre has traced a deep furrow which his successors will only 'be too happy to follow.
It seems that the Government would do credit to themselves and to the country by giving the widow of our late commissioner either an annuity or a pension which would enable her to live in a manner becoming her position.


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: The remarks just
made by the hon. member for Rouville are very appropriate. Last year, I had occasion to visit Paris and to see what is going on in our agency in France. Mr. Roy, who is our representative, does credit to his position. He was appointed by the late Government. We considered that he did his duty so well that we felt bound to create for him a special position and a better one than that which the late Government had given him; because he had managed the business of the agency in a manner nearly perfect. They think and say a good deal of him in Paris.
Moreover, we considered that the province of Quebec, or any other province in the Dominion, may have, if they see fit, their own representative in Paris or elsewhere. But we wanted Mr. Roy to be exclusively the representative of Canada. We came to the conclusion that the representative of Canada in Paris should have no other position than that of representative of Canada as a whole.
The position of our representative in Paris is altogether special. There is in our country a large number of French Canadians, whose ancestors came from France, and they therefore desire that we should be represented in the French capital by a man who will be a credit to us and who will occupy the important position we have created for Mr. Roy.
I asked that our representative in Paris should hold a position higher than that of

a trade commissioner. The Prime Minister
and his colleagues have concurred in that view, and consequently we have appointed Mr. Roy as special representative under the direction of the Prime Minister in his quality of Secretary of External Affairs.
We are paying Mr. Roy a proper salary, which will enable him to do honour to his position, which he does very creditably.
I am glad of the support given us in this matter by the hon. member for Rouville.	A word as to the
second question the hon. member for Rouville has dealt with. Mr. Fabre had a miserable salary. He spent part of that paltry income in doing the good which his kind heart prompted him to do. Mr. Fabre was a distinguished citizen and he did great credit to our country during the whole time that he was there as our representative. Mr. Fabre kept nothing for himself. His purse was always open to help whoever appealed to his kindness and generosity. As a result, he left no fortune after him, and Mrs. Fabre, for whom I have the greatest esteem and a sincere friendship, has repeatedly written to me asking that we should do something in recognition of what Mr. Fa'bre has done for his country. Unfortunately, we have had such numerous demands since we came to power, that we have been compelled, owing to the short time at our disposal, to postpone for the moment the consideration of several of these questions.
I regret to say that Mrs. Fabre's claim is one of them. We have not rejected it, but we postponed its consideration and we will probably consider them all at the same time.
The hon. member for Rouville has just stated facts that are true, and his remarks are such as to help bringing about the result he desires. I take a great deal of interest in the settlement of that question, -and speaking in my own name, I may say that I concur in much of what has been said by the hon. member for Rouville.
Grant to the National Battlefields Commission, $125,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Will my hon. friend the
Postmaster General give me some details of this item? How is the work progressing?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: This is in the department of my hon. friend the Minister of Finance. As I take some interest in it, I may tell my hon. friend something about it; but I do not pretend to be very accurate, because I know only from visits which I make now and again to the place. The National Battlefields Commission continues to do its work under the presidency of Sir George Garneau. It is absolutely the same commission. They submit plans for the approval of the Governor in Council, and then are allowed to go on with the work according to their own judgment.
Mr. PELLETIER.


Rodolphe Lemieux: How is the work progressing in Quebec?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: They did very well
last year.


Rodolphe Lemieux: They have opened new avenues?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: Yes. They have got down as far as the monument. There is a gap which they have not touched in order not to prevent the public from having free access on both sides.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I understand they
were authorized to expropriate a lisiere to connect the battlefields with St. Foye. Has that been done?


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: That has been done
and very fine avenues will be thrown open; they are now well under way. When it is finished it will be one of the beauties of beautiful Quebec.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I remember having seen the plans in Sir George Garneau's office several times. There is a terrible eye-sore, however, and I hope my hon. friend will help Quebec out of the difficulty. The Quebec Ross rifle factory, with that tub on top of one of the Martello towers is an eye-sore.' I hope that the commission will find means, if not by expropriation, at least of arranging with the Ross rifle factory to have that eye-sore removed as soon as possible.


Louis-Philippe Pelletier: I believe Sir George Garneau is thinking of doing something in regard to that.
Customs salaries, miscellaneous, &c., $3,830,000.


George Perry Graham: This is a customs item?


Robert Rogers: My hon. friend knows
that this is the only item left in the Customs Department that is open for any discussion. In view of the fact that we have changed the order, and that any discussion that any hon. gentleman on the other side may desire to enter into, next week, will be quite open; it does not matter whether this item is passed or not. It is only in order to facilitate business that we desire) it passed.


William Ashbury Buchanan: I would like to impress upon the Government a matter concerning the city of Medicine Hat. I brought the attention of the hon. Minister of Customs to the question early in the session at a personal interview. I do not know whether he has changed his mind in regard to the matter or not. At present the city of Medicine Hat is an outport of Calgary. Medicine Hat is now a city of fourteen thousand inhabitants. It is a very important industrial centre with a very heavy customs business, and the inhabi-

tants feel that it should he created into a port of entry. I believe the members of the Government, especially the Minister of Public Works, who is acquainted with Medicine Hat, will agree that Medicine Hat should be a port of entry. This city is ambitious and wants to have all the advantages of a growing city.
I would also like to impress upon the Government the importance of two other points in my constituency, the town of Gleichen and the town of Taber, both of which T understand have made requests to the Government to he made outports of customs, Gleichen an outport of Calgary and Taber an outport of Lethbridge. They are in well settled districts where there is a considerable trade and quite a business in the line of customs.


Robert Rogers: I am sorry that the Minister of Customs is not in his place at the moment. But, so far as Gleichen and Taber are concerned, I know these places, and they are thriving and growing towns, and will certainly merit, at all events, consideration of the claims that my hon. friend has put forward. So far as Medicine Hat is concerned, I entirely agree with the hon. gentleman that it should be made a port of entry. It is one of the .most important towns in the West and it is growing as fast as it is possible for a town of its size to grow. I will direct the attention of the Minister of Customs to the suggestion with the statement that in my judgment Medicine Hat should be created a port of entry.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I did not notice the
passing of the item with regard to telegraph line in Nova Scotia. Perhaps I may be permitted to say that I am informed changes are being made or are in contemplation, substituting telephones for telegraphs on certain of these lines. Can the minister give me information about it?


Robert Rogers: I am not acquainted with the lines to which the hon. gentleman refers, but I may say that I am a great 'believer in telephones instead of telegraphs. I have asked the department to make a . e-port on the subject showing where telegraphs can be replaced by telephones. That report is in course of preparation, and no doubt the lines to which my hon.. friend refers will be considered.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I have reference to
lines in different parts of Cape Breton. They are very useful, but I think that in some cases telephones would be better.


Robert Rogers: It would be impossible
for me to give a definite answer before the report of the officers on the subject is made. I can only say that, so far as my recommendation goes, I will certainly favour
telephones wherever they can reasonably be used. We will make sure of supplying the public wants and giving a good service but, subject to that, we will use telephones wherever possible to replace telegraphs.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Is the minister taking a vote in the estimates to make the change?


Robert Rogers: We have the general vote, and there will be very little expense in connection with the change.
Civil Government-Department of the Secretary of State-salaries, $67,062.50.
Contingencies, $9,500.00.


George Perry Graham: Is the Secretary of State (Mr. Coderre) here?


Robert Rogers: I expected he would be
here. But my hon. friend will see that there is no change except increases of $300 in salaries and $500 in contingencies-very small increases and incidental to the growing department.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I understand that the Printing Bureau is under the direction of the Secretary of State. Could the hon. gentleman who is leading the House give information with regard to a matter which has been brought to my attention. ' I may be misinformed, but I am told that there are young girls working in the Printing Bureau at $3 a week. I submit to the minister that it is absolutely impossible fpr any person to live respectably in this city on so low a salary. Would he tell us what salary is paid to these people, and at what rate do they advance?


Alfred Ernest Fripp: I can enlighten the hon.
member with regard to the Printing Bureau. Young girls hitherto have begun there at $3 a week working up to $8 a week. Last summer the present Secretary of State increased their wages ten per cent; and yesterday I had a deputation of the women before him and I think he promised to give them a further increase.


George Perry Graham: He will have to ask a
vote in the estimates.


Robert Rogers: It will come in the sup-plementaries, I suppose.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I submit that no girl or man should be asked to work for six days a week for $3. The Government, of all people, should not accept the services of any young woman at so paltry a wage as $3 or $3.50. This country is big enough and wealthy enough to pay for good services in a respectable, sufficient and satisfactory way. You should not-have the services of people who are not worth a higher wage. I hope that at once the Government will inquire into the matter to learn what rate of wage a girl needs to keep herself respect-

ably in this city, and let that wage be paid, or let them go somewhere where they can get wages worthy of the services they render.


Robert Rogers: I quite agree with my hon. friend. But the difficulty appears to be that the printing offices in the city of Ottawa pay the same rate of wages, and evidently the department have been following the wage paid by these printing offices. I recognize that the amount is certainly very low and the matter should be considered. But we are met with the same condition when we discuss the general question of the Civil Service. Any girl or man appointed is paid at the start only $500 a year. In my judgment you cannot get a good public servant at that price, and I think that this and the question of the Civil Service tariff should certainly receive consideration.


Frank Oliver: There is this difference between the civil servant at five hundred dollars and the girl at three dollars a week. In the case of the civil servant at five hundred dollars, it is a question of getting efficient service; but in the case of the girl at three dollars a week, it is an absolute case of getting a livelihood. I think it would be a very proper thing for the Government to establish a minimum wage for their employees in the lower grades, because these are the employments in which the people concerned are not so circumstanced so that they can protect themselves by the formation of unions. Men in the higher classes of employment can and do protect themselves by the formation of unions, but it is the people in the lower classes of employment who cannot do so, and they should have such protection as the Government may be able to give them.


Robert Rogers: Judging from what the hon. member for Ottawa (Mr. Fripp) has said, increases have been made very recently in connection with the salaries, and when my hon. friend the Secretary of State is here we will give a detailed statement of the increases that have been made.
Department of the Interior-salaries, $1,018,993.77.


Mr. CROTHERS:: Hon. gentlemen will notice that the increase in this case is $43,757.50.	$28,537 of that is the statutory
increase. The salaries of the following clerkships, two in 1 A, seven in 1 B, eight in 2 A, fifty in 3 A, twelve in 3 B, and twelve sorters, messengers, and so on, amount to $90,100. Decreases: fifty clerkships, amounting to $40,000, and twelve clerkships amounting to $19,200, were cancelled. The decreases affected by the filling of vacanies occasioned by deaths and so on, where appointments have been made at a lower salary than the maxi-Mr. McKENZIE.
mum, amount to $15,680, a total decrease of $74,880. The increases were $118,637, leaving a balance of $43,757.50. The contingencies are not increased at all.


Frank Oliver: I notice that in the third division 'A' there is a large increase, and in the third division 'B' a large decrease. Is that caused by transfers from 'B' to 'A'?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Yes.


George Perry Graham: Could the acting minister give us any information as to the health of the Minister of the Interior ?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I am very glad to be able to tell my hon. friend that we hear from him frequently, and that he is improving quite satisfactorily in the Old Country.
Immigration-salaries of agents and employees in Canada, Great Britain foreign countries, $485,000.


Frank Oliver: What accounts for this increase ?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: It is caused almost entirely by the growth of immigration. The immigration is very much larger this year than it ever was before; I think the increase for. the month of April was sixteen per cent greater than it was a year ago.


Frank Oliver: Is this an increase in the number of officers, or in the salaries paid?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Both.


Mr OLIVER :: Where are the new
officers employed?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Principally in boundary inspection and at ocean ports.


Frank Oliver: It is on the restrictive rather than the attracting side.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The number cf regular immigration employees in Canada, exclusive of the boundary inspection staff, is 225, salaries $209,473. Regular boundary inspectors, 115; customs officers doing immigration inspection work, 89; aggregate salaries of these two classes, $123,000.


Frank Oliver: Has the hon. minister opened up any new agencies for the attraction of immigration?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: There are some new
offices in the United States.


Frank Oliver: Where are they?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I think there is one at Philadelphia; I remember sending a man down, there a short time ago. There are many immigrants coming in there; we had no office in that city, and it was represented that it would be in the interests of immigration to have some one on the ground.


Frank Oliver: Can the minister give us
a list of the new offices that have been

opened, and the offices that have been closed?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: No offices have been closed.


Frank Oliver: Is the Philadelphia office the only new one?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: An office has recently been opened at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.


Frank Oliver: Are there any more in the western States?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The same number
this year as last.


Frank Oliver: Have any new offices
been opened in England?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: There are the same
number of offices in England as there were last year.
Contingencies in Canada, Britain and foreign agencies, and general immigration expenses, $1,000,000.


Mr. SUTHERLAND:: What attention has been paid to the requirements of Ontario in' the propaganda that has been carried on in the United States in regard to immigration?
I see by the Auditor General's report that last year there was considerably over half a million dollars spent in the United States for promoting immigration to Canada and about a quarter of a million dollars spent in Great Britain. Is there any attention beind paid to the unoccupied lands in Ontario in the advertising that is being done in the United States? Is there any effort being made to colonize the lands in Ontario or is the effort being devoted chiefly to western Canada?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I am told that there is one special pamphlet published by the department and distributed throughout the United States and England dealing with Ontario alone.


Donald Sutherland: But the agents as a rule are devoting their energies to promoting immigration to western Canada.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I am told that Ontario gets about one-third of the total immigration.


Donald Sutherland: I have seen reports stating that about 100,000 settlers were brought into Ontario last year. The department have, I believe, eighty-six agents appointed in Ontario for placing immigrants on their arrival and, according to a return brought down in the House a short time ago, there were only 1,356 placed by these eighty-four agents in Ontario. There is surely something radically wrong in regard to the figures that have been published in the press when
it is stated that these eighty-six agents who have been appointed in Ontario have only been able to place 1,356 people during the last year. There is no use talking, there is something wrong in regard to the methods of bringing out and placing agricultural help in this province. The energies of the department have for years been confined almost entirely to promoting immigration to western Canada. Ontario has, for some reason or other, been singled out by the late Government as the one province where little or nothing would be done, and I am sorry to say that the same system has been continued by the present Government and that no reform has been made in that direction.
To-day, instead of attempting in any way to do justice to that province, they are depending on the provincial Government and not only depending on the provincial Government, but the different counties are organizing and forming associations to bring people into these counties and to see that the requirements are looked after. In view of the enormous expenditure for immigration some reformation should be made in regard to this matter. In my own county last week I noticed that there was a meeting called by the various boards of 'trade and that an association was formed with this object in view. The same thing occurred in Middlesex, Norfolk, Lambton and a great many other counties because of the fact that the system that has been in vogue in this province for the last eight years is considered a joke. They do not think of making application to the Department of the Interior for the help that is required on the farm. Why is not the same policy pursued in regard to Ontario that is pursued in the West? I notice in the report, made to the department by Mr. J. Bruce Walker, Commissioner of Immigration at Winnipeg, that in that city there is an office where they receive applications for farm help from the farmers of western Canada and they endeavour as far as possible to supply the demand there. There is nothing of the kind in existence in Ontario.
The province is being drained of every man who is available every year to meet the requirements of the West. Even before the crops are ready for the harvest large excursions are run from every town and village in Ontario and every inducement is being offered to the labourers of the province to go to western Canada and harvest the crops there. The railways, I believe, are doing something that they should not be permitted to do in that respect. They are giving transportation for about ten dollars from points in Ontario to any point in western Canada, but you can get that rate only at these particular times. In view of the condition of affairs, I think

it is very important and very essential that the department should see that the requirements of the farmers of Ontario are met to some extent at least. You have a great many officials in Ontario, but you have no office where applications for farm help are received. You have eighty-four agents this year, and you had eighty-six last. They are termed agents, but they receive no salary. Their instructions are: that if they will communicate with a booking agent in Great Britain, get people to come out here, and place them on a farm in Ontario, they will get a commission for every one so placed. All the work that is being done and all the money thas is being expended is entirely outside of that. You allow a beggarly commission of two dollars-or it may be five dollars-I am not sure which-


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Two dollars.


Donald Sutherland: -for getting into communication with a British booking agent, and placing -a man upon an Ontario farm. Very few agents succeed under this system, and Ontario is being neglected in that respect. You say to the man who is appointed that he will get his little commission of two dollars if he will induce somebody to come out and settle in Ontario. There are a great many counties in Ontario in which not a single man has been placed by any of these agents or by any means of the department during^ the past year. Instead of getting better it is getting worse year after year. There should be some better system adopted in that province, a province that lias contributed generously towards promoting the welfare of Canada, and which does not take any exception to a generous expenditure in this direction. But we do insist that we shall receive fair treatment along with every other province in that respect That is being denied to us to-day. I submit that the system that is in vogue in this Dominion in regard to the province of Ontario is a discriminatory one, that the agents of the maritime provinces and of the province of Quebec are permitted to go to the port of landing,. engage labourers and place them in {hose provinces. Until last year the province of Ontario was denied that privilege. The British booking agent was told that he would not receive the commission or bonus of five dollars each on the immigrants that were sent to Toronto through the instrumentality of the Provincial Government. That has been remedied by the present Government. I go even further than that and say that you should establish in Ontario a system similar to that which they have in western Canada. In Winnipeg, as I have said, they have an office where applications for farm help are received and where an effort is put forth to provide help. I Mr. SUTHERLAND.
have here the report of Mr. J. Bruce Walker, Commissioner of Immigration, and I will read what he says on the matter:
The department, as you are aware, takes no part whatever in finding employment for skilled labour, but foT the unskilled labourer who is anxious for employment at agricultural work, as well as at railway construction, the Labour Bureau of this office arranges immediate employment. During the past year the applications for experienced help received at this office numbered 17,716, while we were able to place only 11,189.
In that office alone 11,189 were placed, whereas in all the broad province of Ontario there were only 1,356 placed by the eighty-six agents of that province. There never was such a dearth of farm labour in Ontario as there is to-day. During the naval debate the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Clark) told us there were enough unemployed men in Calgary alone to man a navy, but I can tell him that he will not find any unemployed men in the province of Ontario. It is as difficult to-day to get farm labour in Ontario during the winter months as in any other season of the year. There are thousands of acres of the best land in that province that are to-day practically producing nothing for want of labour. Ontario has been neglected in this respect in the past, and I contend it is absolutely necessary that the Government should see that justice is done to that province in this respect. From year to year we are increasing the vote for this purpose; last year over half a million dollars was exipended in the United States, and it would appear from the supplementary estimates that the Government is about to greatly increase the agencies in Great Britain. But, so far, we have heard of nothing been done to meet the requirements of Ontario. Of course, it is only a short time since the present Government came into power, and there has been in the interval a change in the head of the Department of the Interior. The present minister unfortunately has been ill, and has not been able to devote attention to the matter, and the Interior Department is being administered by the Minister of Labour who has a great deal of work to do in his own department, I believe that if justice is to be done to Ontario it will be necessary to separate the immigration branch from the Department of the Interior. We have had a member from western Canada head of the Interior Department for a great many years past, and it is probably only right and proper that that should be so, but in my opinion the immigration branch shpuld be entirely separated from the Department of the Interior and some one minister should have charge of it who will see that equal justice will be done to every province and the requirements of the different .parts of the Dominion attended to. If that were

the case you would not find the state of affairs referred to by the hon. .member for Red Deer, who told us tha't in Calgary alone there were-, enough unemployed to man a navy.


Mr. BRADBURY:: He was romancing.


Donald Sutherland: He made the statement anyway and we know as a matter of fact that in certain seasons of the year there are a great many men out of employment in the cities of western Canada. We also know, according to the report of Mr. J. Bruce Walker, that they had placed 11,195 immigrants from that office alone, and we know that the whole 86 agents only placed 1,356 men in Ontario. This is a question that demands 'the immediate attention of the Government. I might refer to the fact that in a great many of the very best counties of Ontario not a single man was placed, and in some of these counties the census returns show the population has decreased more rapidly than in others. For example, in Dufferin, Waterloo, Essex and Perth, not a single man has been placed by the Dominion Government; in Elgin ten men were placed; in Huron thirteen; and in Lambton four. Twenty-eight agents did not place any; eight placed one each. The county councils of Lambton, Norfolk and Middlesex have organized themselves and entered on a propaganda in the old country to supply the counties with labour, entirely ignoring the Government immigration service. The fact that these counties have decided to depend on their own resources is an illustration of the injustice done, not only to those counties, but to almost every county in the province of Ontario.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I have listened to the speech of the hon. member (Mr. Sutherland) with a great deal of interest, and I have to ask him a favour. Last year he put some figures on record showing the falling off in the rural population in many important counties in Ontario. If the hon. member has these figures at hand I will be much obliged ,if he would put them on ' Hansard ' ; they show how the cities are increasing and how the rural population is falling off.


Donald Sutherland: I 'am sorry I have not the figures at hand, but it is easy to find them in the census returns. In the old rural settled districts of Ontario, outside of some of the newer districts, there has been an actual falling off of somewhere in the neighbourhood of 140,000 in the population during the past ten years. I regret to say that practically very little effort is being made by the Government to settle the lands in northern Ontario. We hear .a great deal about western Canada in the literature published and circulated broadcast through Great Britain and the United States, but
we hear nothing of Northern Ontario, and many people do not realize that we have still unsettled there millions and millions of acres of the best land to be found in the world. Some reasonable effort should be made to induce settlers to go on that land. It may 'be said that the federal Government controls the lands in western Canada and that the province of Ontario owns and controls the lands in Ontario, but that is not sufficient justification for the discrimination which takes place. I think the same evenhanded justice should be dealt out to every province. That is another reason why I believe the Immigration Department should be separated entirely from the Department of the Interior.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: In view of the statement made by my hon. friend (Mr. Sutherland), which I have no doubt is practically correct, I would commend to the House some figures touching on immigration to Ontario and to the other provinces. In 1900-1, Ontario got about one in eight of the immigrants coming to Canada, and in 1905-6 one in four. The last year for which we have figures, 1912-13, shows the destination of the immigrants as follows:
Maritime provinces	19,806
Ontario	122,798
Quebec	 64,000
Manitoba	43,813
Saskatchewan	45,147
Alberta	 48,073
British Columbia	 57,960
Total	402,632
While there may not have been very many farm labourers settled on the farms in any particular county, the result seems to be that Ontario has got a very fair share of the total immigration last year, namely, 122,798 out of 402,452.


Alfred Ernest Fripp: They could not have stayed in this province.


Frank Oliver: The subject of immigration is sufficiently important to attract the attention of everyone concerned in the welfare of Canada.


Frank Oliver: Following what my hon. friend from South Oxford (Mr. Sutherland) has said, complaining that immigration has gone to the West rather than to Ontario, I find from the homestead returns that there were 10,000 fewer homestead entries made during the fiscal year ending March 31, 1913, than in the fiscal year ending March 31, 1911, so that, if immigration has gone to the West, it has not gone on to the land. I am afraid that the tendency of immigration has been to the towns rather than to the land, either in the West ot in the East. I just bring these figures to the attention of the hon. minister and of the Government for their careful consideration,

and for such action as they may deem necessary in the matter. I further find, by a comparison of figures given by the hon. Minister of Finance in his budget speech that the proportion of immigration coming from continental Europe is increasing _ in comparison with the proportion coming from the British Isles and from the United States. It is desirable that we should as far as possible keep up the proportion coming from the British Isles, however high our flow of immigration reaches.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: In the year 1909-1910
there were 59,790 immigrants from the British Isles; 103,000 from the United States and 45,000 from other countries. In the year 1910-1911 there was a very great change; there were 123,000 from the British Isles as against 121,000 from the United States. In the year 1911-1912 there were
138.000	from the British Isles as against
133.000	from the United States. Last year there were 150,000 from the British Isles as against 139,000 from the United States. Therefore the proportion is getting larger.


Frank Oliver: I was not making that comparison; I was making the comparison between the proportion coming from the British Isles and the proportion coming from continental Europe. The proportion from continental Europe is increasing more rapidly than that from the British Isles.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: That seems to be true. In the year 1911-1912, the total from all other countries was 82,000. In the year 1912-1913, the total was 112,000.


John Howard Sinclair: When we reach the supplementary estimates, I would like to get some information from the hon. Minister of the Interior as to the number of Canadians who are leaving Canada for the United States. In the province from which I come there is a constant drain of our young people to the United States. I understand a record is kept of all those who go to the United States with the intention of living there, and there is a working agreement between the Government of the United States and the Government of Canada by which this information is obtained from the officers of the United States Government. I am informed that correspondence is taking place between the department and the post offices in various parts of Canada, inquiring the reasons why our young people go across the boundary line for the purpose of remaining there. It would be interesting if that information were tabulated and were available to members of Parliament.
A few days ago I received from a gentleman in my constituency a very interesting letter in which an inquiry was made as to a young man who had left that part of the country to go to the United States with the intention of remaining there permanently.
Mr. OLIVER.
A letter was sent from the Department of the Interior to the postmaster in the village of Sherbrooke, where this young man lived, asking him to ascertain why this young man had left for the United States. The letter is as follows:
Sir,-It has been brought to my attention that the party, whose name and address is given below, went duriBg the month of August last to the United States with the object of taking up permanent residence there. The department, feeling that any large number of departures of good settlers means a serious loss to the Dominion, has decided to make inquiries regarding the truth of reported departures and the cause which brought about the same. I would therefore consider it a favour if you would make inquiries ascertaining if the party mentioned below really went to the United States with the intention of residing there permanently. If so, give if possible, the reason which led to such action and in general terms make as full a report as is necessary to put the department in possession of all the facts affecting the case. I would appreciate it if you would make your reply on the reverse side of this sheet and for that purpose I enclose herewith an addressed envelope upon which no postage is required.
Your obedient servant,
(Sgd.) W. W. Scott.
The name of the young man is Lloyd Fielding Pye, age seventeen, Canadian, residence, Sherbrooke, N.S.; intended residence, Salem, Mass. This letter was handed to the father of the young man, and he was asked to give the reason why his son had left Canada. This is the letter sent to the department.
Sir,-Your inquiry of 11th instant addressed to the postmaster at Sherbrooke, N.S., has been handed to me for reply. The boy, Lloyd Fielding Pye, aged 17 is my third son, born 'at Sherbrooke, N.S.j as were also his seven brothers and one sister.
The reason he and others have left this part of the country is-the want of transportation facilities. This part of the country has been and is at present producing a good class of citizens, much better than the European immigrants; but the products of our labour cannot reach a market until its value is used up in transport charges, therefore the labourer or producer must go to the market of his labour or production. The Canadian Pacific railway was built into British Columbia when it had less white oopulation than this county, Guysborough. Truly British Columbia has grown but there have been more people left Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island and went to the United States, never to return, than the whole population of all that part of Canada, west of Manitoba, leaving the old folks and the little children at home. The former, unable to work the farm, struggle along unproductive, then die; the latter go to join their brothers and sisters in the United States, as soon as their age will allow them to work in a Massachusetts factory, leaving many old abandoned homesteads so overgrown with spruce and fir that now and

for some years past our lumbermen have been cutting and shipping to the United States lumber that grew on the exact spot which formerly grew grain or vegetables.
So long as our country is governed by politicians instead of, statesman who care nothing for our people unless and until they have a vote, we must expect our natural resources to lie undeveloped, and our best crop, our fellow Canadians, to be gathered and harvested by a Government that knows the worth of our Citizens better than our own Government does. In this particular case, a brother preceded him by two years and there are five more brothers may follow as soon as they are old enough, probably one of them this coming summer and with companions as well, for some families here have as many relations in the United States as they have here. Give us railway communication with the markets for what we produce and our boys will stay home, and some of those who have gone will return.
Yours truly,
C. W. Pye.
I hope that letter will soften the already soft heart of the Minister of Railways, though I do not read it for that purpose. It suggests a very interesting phase of the works of the Department of the Interior and I think it would be interesting if we could discover the reason why so many of our young people go to the United States. If this information is in such shape that it could be tabulated to be placed before the members of the House, I am sure it would be read with great interest.


Mr. BLAIN:: The young men referred to by the hon. member for Guysborough do not need to go to the United States to get employment in factories; they could find splendid employment at remunerative salaries in the province of Ontario and other provinces in manufacturing establishments of the same kind. They must have had some other reason.


Donald Sutherland: I understood the
minister to state that of the 402,000 immigrants that came to Canada last year, 122,798 came to Ontario. If anything were required to condemn the system that has been in vogue for placing farm labourers in Ontario, this statement would do it. Last year 1,356 men were placed by the eighty-six agents in Ontario. We are told of 122,000 people coming, and we know of the thousands of men required on the farms of Ontario. As to these 122,000, we know that, as a matter of fact, a great many of them were returned Canadians, and not immigrants at all. We know also that a great many of those who come into Ontario , or into the other older provinces want to engage only for a short period, and other are diverted from their destinations by agents, their intention being to see the West as soon as possible, and in a short time they go west. And of the young men growing up in Ontario, tens of thousands have gone west. What I strongly object to is the system that has been pursued by our railways. We have been building railways-we shall be asked in a short time to grant large subsidies to a railway to develop our country-and I believe these railways are doing a rank injustice to the farmers of Ontario by seducing away from their province the help that is necessary to work their farms, by giving low rates at certain seasons of the year, a system that would not be tolerated if applied to any other class than those in the rural districts. If you ascertain the ultimate destination of the larger portion of this 122,000, you will find that it is not the province of Ontario. The very fact that we have so large an immigration into Ontario as shown by the figures condemns the system adopted in this province. I may say, candidly, it was adopted in this province for political purposes, to prevent the province of Ontario from meeting the demands of the province_ in 1907, and it, has been carried on ever since that lime. I had hoped and expected that a change of policy would take place when there was a change of Government', and I exceedingly reyreti to see the old system still in vogue and the same injustice done to the province of Ontario as before.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I do not want to do anything to prevent the passage of the minister's estimates, but the hon. member has brought forward a most interesting question. Will he tell me how the Government is to blame if 122,000 immigrants have come to Ontario and then gone on west, and that so large a portion of the natives of Ontario have done the same ? And would the hon. gentleman point out the remedy ? We in the East are interested, as well as the people of Ontario. They tell us that 19,000 immigrants come to the maritime provinces. But unfortunately, [DOT]after ten years you take the census, you find that you have an increase of not more than 19,000. Our people go away, but we do not think that the Government deliberately plans to take them away.


Donald Sutherland: The hon. membeT would have known that I pointed out the remedy if he had followed my argument. I pointed out that under the system in western Canada, applications are received from the farmers for the help they require, and the department at Winnipeg endeavours to see that the requirements are met. But in Ontario we have no such system. We have a large number of appointees, not on salary as they are in the West, but on commission. The Department of Immigration furnishes them with a list of booking agents in Great Britain and elsewhere to communicate with, and tells them that if they will get an immi-
1155?)

1X560
grant to come, they will be paid two dollars.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: And they do come into Ontario at the rate of over 120,000 a year. Why do they leave ?


Donald Sutherland: If they come to Ontario, why is not the same means provided to place them ? Is it owing to the lack of system that they come here and then take the next train out of the province ? If that is the system, then I think the argument of the hon. gentleman condemns it more strongly than anything else. If 120,000 come here, there ought to be means to meet some of the thousands of applications sent in by the farmers of the province.


John Hampden Burnham: In my county in the past there has been a disposition on the part of the people to move, but it is not so now, and that is due not to the fact the hon. gentleman points out, that there are not agents, but to the fact that the wages are rising. I think now of the case of a man who demanded not $30, but $35, a month and his board, and he got it.
Administration of Chinese immigration, salaries, $21,000; contingencies, $13,000.
Mr. MoKENZIE: A document has been placed in my hands which I wish to bring to the attention of the acting Minister of the Interior. It is from a very deserving class of people who come from eastern countries to the province of Nova Scotia, and particularly to the county of Cape Breton. I understand that there is a regulation under which immigrants are compelled to have a certain amount of money when they come into this country -I think it is two hundred dollars-and this blanket regulation, which covers all Asiatics, applies to Syrians coming into Canada. I think I can place before the minister what I have to say in regard to this matter by reading this petition which has been placed in my hands;
The petition of the undersigned Syrian residents of the county of Cape Breton humbly showeth:
That the Syrian population of Nova Scotia is 2,000.
That with the exception of immigrants arriving within the last three years, all the Syrian population are naturalized British subjects;
That in the entire Syrian population there is not one person receiving aid as a pauper;
That the average wealth of the said population is equal to, if it does not exceed, the average wealth of all other nations residing in Nova Scotia;
That the percentage of crime among the said population is smaller than that of any other people in Nova Scotia, and that the entire population are Christians and active church attendants;
Mr. SUTHERLAND.
That the death rate is lower than the average, and that they are entirely free from disease;
That many of the said residents of Nova Scotia are separated from their wives and other members of their families, and that they desire that they should be permitted to immigrate into Canada, particularly in cases where they have homes awaiting them, without being obliged to show that they have two hundred dollars in cash.
Your petitioners humbly submit that it is an injustice to the said population to be placed with Chinese and Japanese in respect to immigration rights, and respectfully submit that they should be admitted into Canada on the same terms as any white European immigrant, and pray that such steps may be taken as will amend the law in this respect.
These Syrians in the county of Cape Breton, two thousand in number, are proving to be first-class citizens. Some of them left their wives and children behind them, and, although they are prepared to look after them, they find it difficult to send $200 to each of them in order to bring them to this country. When a man comes to Canada, becomes a naturalized British subject and establishes himself in a good position, he should be permitted without any restriction to bring his wife and children into this country, provided they are free from disease and are such persons as may reasonably be permitted to enter into Canada.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: This matter was
brought to the attention of the Minister of the Interior some months ago. He gave it his attention at that time, but, I think, did not arrive at any decision. It will have further consideration.


Frank Oliver: I understand that last
year about 8,000 Chinese came into this country. They pay a head tax of $500, and obtain employment in this country. The purpose of the head tax was to prevent Chinese immigration, but evidently it has not and is not doing so. For a time after the head tax was raised from $100 to $500, it did have the effect of preventing Chinese immigration, but circumstances have changed, and last year there was an immigration as I have said of 8,000 Chinese, all of whom paid the head tax and are now in employment. Is it the intention of the Government to recognize the fact that the head tax of $500 does not prohibit Chinese immigration ? I think I am safe in saying that the immigration of Chinese into Canada last year was larger than it has been in any other year in the history of this country.


Robert Rogers: The point raised by my hon. friend is rather a wide one. It may be true that Chinese immigration has increased somewhat, but that increase is largely due to the fact that in the western provinces the demand for labour is so great

that the Chinaman coming in there finds ready employment. Of course one Chinaman always brings two or three others, because when he obtains employment at a satisfactory wage he writes home for his friends. I understand that the Chinamen in Vancouver and Victoria have recently raised their tariff of wages, and all this tends to attract Chinese immigration to western Canada. I quite agree with my hon. friend when he says that this is a matter which requires consideration. A few years ago the head tax of $100 prevented Chinese immigration to a greater extent, perhaps, than the tax of $500 does to-day, because conditions have changed, and there is a ready opening for their services. I think this is a matter that will require consideration at the bands of the Government, with a view to seeing that we do not get too great an immigration of Chinese into western provinces.


Frank Oliver: Of course my hon. friend is aware that Chinese immigration is not what would be called a free immigration. There are Chinese companies organized for the purpose of promoting that immigration, and they are very strong commercial organizations. They enter into an arrangement with the Chinese whereby the head tax is advanced by the company and repaid dn due course. That is a -perfectly legitimate transaction, of course, which can only be carried on when both the financiers who provide the money and the labourers who earn it are Chinese. My hon. friend must be aware that this is not an ordinary immigration by any means. While I do not want to press the Government on the subject, I take this opportunity of bringing to their attention a condition of facts which is measurably startling, and which certainly calls for consideration, and in my humble judgment, for action.


George Henry Bradbury: Would you suggest
raising the tax?


Frank Oliver: It is not my business to suggest, but it seems to me that that would be a reasonable proposition.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Two days ago we received complaints along the line referred to by my hon. friend, and we are taking the matter into consideration.


James McCrie Douglas: Will the minister explain how the disposition of this money derived from the importation of Chinamen is made? I understand that the provinces through which the Chinamen enter Canada receive a certain proportion of the money. Naturally nearly all of the Chinamen enter through British Columbia, but many of them scatter throughout Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Do these provinces receive a share of the money derived from the head tax?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I think I am right in saying that the tax is $500 each, and that half of it goes to the Dominion, and the other half to the province through which they enter.


James McCrie Douglas: Naturally, nearly all
of them enter through British Columbia, but many of them go mto the prairie provinces. Would it not be fair for the other provinces to derive a share of the benefit, if it can be called a benefit, of that head tax?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The law has not been changed since 1904, but my hon. friend's suggestion is worthy of consideration.
Mines branch, for apparatus and equipment, salaries of inspectors, chemist, machinist, clerical assistance, arid travelling expenses in connection with the investigations of the manufacture and storage of explosives in Canada, $50,000.


Frank Oliver: What is the meaning of this-item which refers to the investigations of the manufacture and storage of explosives? This year the estimate is $55,000, while last year it was only $5,000. Has the minister got some new scheme? _


Mr. RHODES:: The Minister of Mines is not in his seat, but my hon. friend's question will be called to his attention, and he will give an explanation.


George Perry Graham: Several members have
asked me whether, when the supplementary estimates come up next week any of the ministers will have gone away.


Robert Rogers: I do not think any of
the ministers are going away. We will see that they are here.


James Joseph Hughes: I would like to ask the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to be here next week, as I desire to put some questions to him particularly regarding the dismissal of the captain of a life-saving station at Souris.


Mr. HAZEN:: When the supplementaries come up next week my hon. friend will have ample opportunity to ask me questions.


James Joseph Hughes: Will they be reached on Monday or Tuesday?


John Douglas Hazen: They will probably be
reached on Monday or' Tuesday.


James Joseph Hughes: I want to ask about that matter particularly, because I think it was a very improper dismissal. I also want some information with regard to the lobster hatcherv at Georgetown, which ha3 been afflicted by the application of the patronage system, and has gone all wrong.
Indians-Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and Northwest territories, $544,498.


William Ashbury Buchanan: I understand that
the grazing lease on the Blood Indian reserve expires on the 1st July, this year, and I understand that petitions ha,ve been presented to the Government, asking that the leases be not renewed, but that instead the Government should establish a new method, if they cannot arrange with the Indians to remove their reserve to some other part of the country. The Blood Indian reserve covers about 550 square miles, or 350,000 acres, and is in the most fertile part of southern Alberta. It is very valuable land, and the people there are particularly anxious that it should be opened up to settlement. It has been the practice in the past to give grazing leases practically for the whole reserve. These will expire on the 1st of July, and it is suggested that, instead of renewing them, small tracts of land should be leased to the settlers in that district so that they can go into the raising of cattle, if the Indians refuse to allow the reserve to he opened up for settlement. At present the farmers, with only one-quarter or one-half .section, have not much opportunity to go in for cattle raising. The people are anxious to have mixed farming developed, and the proposition is made that the Government should provide for small leases to the farmers. The Indians are quite favourable to it. I think it would help to encourage mixed farming and to make the reserve more productive to the people of southern Alberta.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I am very glad that
my hon. friend has brought this matter up, I have had it under consideration for some time and I quite agree, with him that there is a very large tract of country that is substantially non-productive. I think something should be done with it. We are considering it very carefully.
Indians-British Columbia, $135,290.


Frank Oliver: 
George Henry Bradbury: How could they know?


Frank Oliver: I do not know how they could know, but my hon. friend can very well realize that the government of a province carrying on business according to the svstem we have-even the members of the British Columbia Government-would not dare to take a quarter of a million dollars out of the treasury of the province and pay it to a band of Indians unless they knew as a matter of fact how they were going to get that money back. They could not know how they were going to get that money back unless they had an understanding with the Dominion Government in regard to that transfer. .
Indians, generally, $107,500.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: There are some Indians in my constituency and there are two buildings being put up for the teachers. Thereare two schools, one at Eskas-oni, in North Cape Breton, and the other at Nyanza in Victoria. I understand that the Government has very properly agreed to build houses for these teachers, as the Indian reserve has no suitable place for their accommodation. There is a difficulty about the house bought at Nyanza. It was constructed to be heated with a furnace, but no furnace was put in. The teacher had a pretty hard time last winter, there being no furnace and no other means of heating. I would suggest to the minister that a furnace be put in, as the building was built with that intention. I have not seen the house, but I believe it is very nice, and I think a proper thing would be to put in a furnace, or if not a furnace, to see that the building is heated in some other way.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: 
Frank Oliver: This is a very large item, the subject is a very important one, but I do not think it would be proper at this

moment to bring up any serious discussion or ask for any large amount of information upon it. I think the only thing to do is to pass it, and perhaps revert to it when we come to the supplementaries and when we will have more time than we have now.


Robert Rogers: I appreciate what my
hon. friend has said. We will be glad to see that he has every opportunity that he may desire when we come to the supplementary estimates.


Frank Oliver: I do not wish to make
any remarks myself, but I am sure that the Government would be able to place on record the particulars as to what they are doing, and I should think they would be glad of the opportunity.


George Perry Graham: The public would be very glad to know about the Canadian national parks, and a concrete statement might be made when the supplementary estimates come up. Now that we have finished the main estimates, and as the Minister of Militia is absent, I would like him to be reminded of the promise he made me the other night, and that the dropped item for the drill hall in Renfrew be put in the additional supplementary estimates.


Robert Rogers: I will remind the Minister of Militia.


George Perry Graham: Press it on him hard.


David Henderson: Pound it into him.


Robert Rogers: I really think you are
entitled to that.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. Rogers, House adjourned at 11.42 p.m.

Monday, June 2, 1913.