1915-02-11

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEES.

[Stage Direction]
Sir ROBERT BORDEN (Prime Minister) presented the following report of the special committee appointed to prepare and report, with all convenient speed, lists of members to compose the Select Standing Committees of the House during the present session:
No. l.
ON PRIVILEGES AND ELECTIONS. Messieurs
Aikins (Sir Janies), Barker,
Barnard,
Bennett (Calgary), Bennett (Simcoe), Blondin,
Borden (Sir Robert), Boys,
Bristol,
Bureau,
Carvell,
Charlton,
Chisholm (Antigonish) Coderre,
Crothers,
Demers, [DOT]
Descarries,
Devlin,
Doherty,
Fripp,
German,
Kay,
Lafortune,
Lamarche,
Lancaster,
Lapointe
(Kamouraska ), Lemieux,
Maclean (Halifax), Marcile (Bagot), Munson,
Nickle,
Northrup,
Porter,
Rainville,
Robidoux,
Ross,
SSvigny,
Thomson (Qu'Appelle), Tremain, and Wilson (Laval).-40.
[Stage Direction]
No. 2. ON RAILWAYS, CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES.
Messieurs
Achim,
Aikins (Sir James), Armstrong (Lambton) Arthurs,
Baker,
Barker,
Barnard,
Barrette,
I Sola mi,
Bellemare,
Bennett (Calgary), Bennett (Simcoe), Bickerdike,
Blain,
Boivin,
Boyce,
Boyer,
Boys,
Brabazon,
Bradbury,
Bristol,
Buchanan,
Bureau,
Carroll,
Cash,
Chabot,
Charlton,
Clark (Red Deer), Clements,
Cochrane,
Cockshutt,
Copp,
Cruise,
Currie,
Delisle,
Descarries,
Devlin,
Donaldson,
Douglas,
Edwards,
Elliot,
Ethier,
Fisher,
Forget (Sir Rodolphe), Fowler,
Fripp,
Gauthier (Gaspd), Gauvreau,
German,
Girard,
Gordon,
Graham,
Green,
Guilbault,
Guthrie,
Hartt,
Henderson,
Hepburn,
Jameson,
Kemp,
Knowles,
Lachance,
Lalor,
Lamarche,
Lancaster,
LanctOt,
Lapointe
(Kamouraska),

Lapointe	Paquet,
(Montreal, St. J.),	Pardee,
Law,	Porter,
Lemieux,	Pugsley,
L'Esp6rance,	Rhodes,
Macdonald,	Schaffner,
Macdonell,	Sharpe (Lisgar ),
Maclean (York, O.),	Sharpe (Ontario),
MacNutt,	Smith,
McCraney,	Smyth,
McCrea,	Stanfield,
McCurdy,	Stevens,
McKenzie,	Sutherland,
McLean	Taylor,
(Queens, P.E.I.),	Thomson (Qu'Appelle),
McLean (Sunbury),	Thornton,
McLeod,	Tobin,
Marshall,	Tremain,
Martin, (Regina),	Turgeon,
Middlebro,	Turriff,
Molloy,	Wallace,
Morphy,	Weichel,
Murphy,	White (Renfrew),
Neely,	White (Victoria.Alta.),
Nesbitt,	Wilson (Laval),
Nickle,	Wilson (Wentworth),
Northrup,	and
Oliver,	Wright.-117.
And that the quorum of the said committee	
do consist of twenty-five members.	
No. 3.	
ON MISCELLANEOUS PRIVATE BILLS.	
Messieurs	
Ames,	Lamarche,
Armstrong	Lavall6e,
(York, O),	Macdonell,
Ball,	McLean
Blondin,	(Sunbury),
Boulay,	McLeod,
Bourassa,	McMillan,
Boyce,	Marcil
Boyer,	(Bonaventure),
Boys,	Martin
Broder,	(Montreal, Ste.M.),
Bureau,	Mondou,
Burnham,	Morris,
Carrick,	Morrison,
Carvell,	Murphy,
Chisholm	Pacaud,
(Antigonish),	Papineau,
Clarke	Paul,
(Wellington),	Perley
Davidson,	(Sir George),
Devlin,	Porter,
Ethier,	Proulx,
Forget	Reid,
(Sir Rodolphe),	(Grenville),
Fripp,	R*obb,
Gauthier	Ross,
(St. Hyacinthe),	Scott,
Gauvreau,	Sharpe
Girard,	(Ontario),
Glass,	Shepherd,
Gord'on,	Steele,
Guthrie,	Stewart
Hepburn,	(Hamilton),
Hughes	Thoburn,
(Victoria),	Tobin,
Jameson,	Turriff,
Kemp,	Walker and
Knowles,	White (Renfrew).
Lachance, And that the quorum of the said committee do	
consist of ten members.	
No. 4.
ON STANDING ORDERS. Messieurs
Achim,
Alguire,
Armstrong (Lambton), Barrette,
Best,
Boulay,
Burrell,
Chabot,
Cromwell,
Doherty,
Fortier,
Hazen,
Knowles,
Kyte,
Maclean (York, O.), MacNutt,
McCoig,
McCraney,
Marcile (Bagot), Michaud,
Morris,
Paquet,
Paul,
Reid (Ristigouche), Rhodes,
Roche,
Scott,
Seguin,
Sharpe (Lisgar), Stanfield,
Turgeon,
Verville, and White (Leeds).-33.
And that the quorum of the said committee do consist of seven members.
No. 5.
ON PRINTING. Messieurs
Bickerdike,
Bowman,
Brabazon,
Brouillard,
Cardin,
Chabot,
Clark (Bruce),
Clarke (Wellington), Currie,
Douglas,
Elliot,
Graham,
Gray,
No.

[Stage Direction]
LavallSe,
L'Esp6rance,
Martin
(Montreal, Ste. M ), Middlebro,
Murphy,
Nicholson,
Roche,
Stevens,
Verville,
White (Victoria, Alta.), and Wilson
(Wentworth).-24.
6.

[Stage Direction]
Messieurs
Aikins (Sir James), Baker,
Bennett (Simcoe), Blain,
Boys,
Carvell,
Casgrain,
Chisholm (Antigonish); Chisholm (Inverness), Clarke (Essex),
Clarke (Wellington), Clements,	/
Crothers,
Davidson,
Edwards,
Fisher,
Foster (Kings, N.S.), Fowler,
Fripp,
Garland,
German,
Hughes (Kings, P.E.I. Kyte,
Lalor,
Lancaster,
Maclean (Halifax), McCoig,
McCraney,
McCrea,
McKenzie,
McLeod,
Marshall,
Martin (Montreal, Ste. M.),
.Martin, (Regina), Meighen,
Merner,
Michaud,
Middlebro,
Molloy,
Mondou,
Morphy,
Morrison,
Murphy,
Neely,
Nicholson,
Nickle,
N'orthrup,
) Pardee,
Proulx,
Pugsley,
Reid (Restigouche), Rhodes,
Robidoux,
[Stage Direction]
Rogers,	Tobin,
Sinclair,	Tremain,
Smyth,	Truax,
Stanfield,	White (Leeds), and
Stewart (Lunenburg), Wilcox.-63.
And that the quorum of the said committee do consist of twenty-one members.
[Stage Direction]
No. 7. ON BANKING AND COMMERCE.
Aikins	Messieurs Kemp,
(Sir James),	Knowles,
Ames,	Law,
Armstrong	Lemieux,
(Lambton),	L'Espfirance,
Armstrong	Loggie,
(Y'ork, O),	Macdonald,
Baker,	Macdonell,
Ball,	Maclean
Barker,	(Halifax),
Barnard,	Maclean
Bellemare,	(York, O.),
Bennett	McCraney,
(Calgary),	McCurdy,
Best,	McLean
Bickerdike,	(Sunbury),
Boivin,	McLeod,
Boyce,	McMillan,
Bristol,	Marshall,
Broder,	Martin
Buchanan,	(Rgina),
Burnham,	Meighen,
Cardin,	Middlebro,
Carrick,	Nesbitt,
Carvell,	Nickle,
Charlton,	Northrup,
Clark	Osier
(Bruce),	(Sir Edmund)
Clark	Pacaud,
(Red Deer),	Papineau,
Cockshutt,	Pardee,
Copp,	Perley
Currie,	(Sir George),
Demers,	Porter,
Edwards,	* Power,
Fisher,	Pugsley,
Forget	Rainville,
(Sir Rodolphe),	Rhodes,
Fortier	Robb,
Foster	Roche,
(Kings, N.S.),	Ross,
Foster	Sexsmith,
(Sir George),	Sharpe
Fowler,	(Lisgar),
Gauthier	Sharpe
(St. Hyacinthe),	(Ontario),
Glass,	Sinclair.
Graham,	Steele,
Gray,	Stewart,
Guthrie,	(Hamilton),
Hanna,	Stewart
Henderson,	(Lunenburg),
Hughes	Sutherland,
(Kings P.E.I.)	Thompson
Hughes	(Yukon),
(Victoria),	Thomson
Jameson,	(Qu'Appelle),
Kay,	Thornton,

Tobin,	[DOT] Webster,
Turriff,	Weichel and
Verville,	White (Leeds).
Warnock,
And that the quorum of the said committee do consist of twenty-one members.
[Stage Direction]
No. 8. ON AGRICULTURE AND COLONIZATION.
Messieurs
Achim,	McLean
Alguire,	(Queens. P.E.I.),
Armstrong (Lambton),	McMillan,
Armstrong (York, O.),	Marcile (Bagot),
Arthurs,	Marshall,
Ball,	Meighen,
Best,	Merner,
Boivin,	Molloy,
Bourassa,	Morphy,
Bowman,	Morris,
Broder,	Morrison,
Brouillard,	Munson,
Buchanan,	Neely,
Burrell,	Oliver,
Cash,	Pacaud,
Champagne,	Paquet,
Chisholm	Paul,
(Antigonish),	Proulx,
Chisholm (Inverness),	Richards,
Clark (Red Deer),	Robb,
Clarke (Wellington),	Roche,
Cromwell,	Ross,
Cruise,	Schaffner,
Currie.	Scott,
Delisle,	Seguin,
Donaldson,	Sexsmith,
Douglas,	Sharpe (Lisgar),
Edwards,	Sharpe (Ontario),
Elliot,	Sinclair,
Fortier,	Smith,
Foster (Kings, N.S.),	Steele,
Garland,	Stewart (Lunenburg),
Gauthier (Gasp6),	Sutherland,
Gauvreau,	Taylor,
Girard,	Thoburn,
Glass,	Thompson (Yukon),
Gordon,	Thomson (Qu'Appelle),
Graham,	Thornton,
Guilbault,	Truax,
Hanna,	Turriff,
Hartt,	Walker,
Henderson,	Wallace,
Hughes (Victoria),	Warnock,
Kay,	Webster,
Lanctdt,	Weichel,
Lewis,	White (Renfrew),
Lovell,	Wilcox,
MacNutt,	Wilson (Laval),
McCoig,	Wilson (Wentworth),
McCrea,	and Wright.-98.
And that the quorum	of the said committee
do consist of twelve members.	
No.	9.
ON MARINE AND FISHERIES.	
Messieurs	
Alguire,	Bradbury,
Barnard,	Cardin,
Boulay,	Casgrain,

No. 12.
OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES. Messieurs
Chisholm (Inverness), Clarke (Essex), Clements,
Copp,
Fowler,
Gauthier, (Gaspfi), Hazen,
Hughes
(Kings, P.E.I.), Jameson,
Kyte,
Lafortune,
Lapointe
(Montreal, St. J.), Loggie,
McCurdy,
McKenzie,
McLean
(Queens, P.E.I.), Morrison,
Nicholson,
Pardee,
Power,	t
Robidoux, / Shepherd,
Sinclair,
Stevens,
Stewart (Lunenburg), Taylor,
Truax,
Turgeon,
Wallace, and Wilcox.-36.
of the said committee
Burnham,
Descarries,
Devlin,
Foster
(Sir George),
Gray,
Hanna,
Lapointe
(Montreal, St. J.),
I .avalise,
Lemieux,
March (Bonaventure), Perley (Sir George), Rainville,
Reid (Restigouche), Schaffner, and Taylor.-15.
the said committee
And that the quorum do consist of ten members.
And that the quorum of
do consist of five members.
[Stage Direction]
No. 13. ON THE LIBRARY.
[Stage Direction]
No. 10. ON MINES AND MINERALS.
Messieurs
Arthurs,	Loggie,
Carrick,	Lovell,
Carroll,	Macdonald,
Chisholm (Antigonish), McMillan,	
Cochrane,	Marcil ( Bonaventure ),
Cockshutt,	Merner,
Devlin,	Mondou,
Douglas,	Nesbitt,
Foster (Kings,	N.S.), ^ Osier (Sir Edmund),
Garland,	% Richards,
Green,	Sexsmith,
Guilbault,	Shepherd,
Hartt,	Smith,
Hepburn,	Smyth,
Lalor,	Thompson (Yukon),
Law,	Turriff, and
Lemieux, Lewis,	Walker.-35.
And that the	quorum of the said committee
do consist of ten members. No. 11.	
ON FORESTS,	WATERWAYS AND WATER-POWERS. Messieurs
Ames,	Green,
Barrette,	Henderson,
BSland,	Michaud,
Bellemare,	Munson,
Blain,	Osier (Sir Edmund),
Bourassa,	Perley (Sir George),
Bowman,	Richards,
Brabazon,	Rogers,
Champagne,	Stewart
Charlton,	(Hamilton),
Cochrane,	Thoburn,
Coderre,	Warnock,
Cromwell,	Webster,
Cruise,	White
Davidson,	(Victoria, Alta.),
Donaldson,	Wilson (Laval), and
Ethier,	Wright-32.
And that the quorum of the said committee do consist of ten members.
Messieurs
Bgland,
Borden (Sir Robert), Boyer,
Broder,
Casgrain,
Clark (Bruce),
Copp,
Crothers,
Doherty,
Foster (Sir George), Laurier (Sir Wilfrid), Lemieux,
Lewis,
Meighen,
Pardee,
Pugsley, and Sevigny.-17.
On motion of Sir Robert Borden, the leport was concurred in.
Sir ROBERT BORDEN moved:: That the Select Standing Committees of this House shall severally be empowered to examine and inquire into all such matters and things as may be referred to them by the House, and to report from time to time their observations and opinions thereon, with power to send for persons, papers and records, with the exception of the Committee on Debates and that on the Library of Parliament.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Robert Laird Borden: That a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint Their Honours that this House will unite with them in the formation of a Joint Committee of both Houses on the subject of the Printing of Parliament, and that the members of the Select Standing Committee on Printing, viz.: Messrs. Bickerdike, Bowman, Brabazon, Brouil-lard, Cardirr, Chabot, Clark (Bruce), Clarke (Wellington), Currie, Douglas, Elliot, Graham, Gray, LavallSe, Lesperance, Martin (Montreal, St. Mary's), Middlebro, Murphy, Nicholson, Roche, Stevens, Verville, White (Victoria, Alta.), and Wilson (Wentworth), will act as members, on the part of this House, on the said Joint Committee on the Printing of Parliament.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.	,

Robert Laird Borden: That a message be sent to the Senate to inform their Honours that this House has appointed Messrs. BSland, Borden (Sir Robert),

Boyer, Broder, Casgrain, Copp, Clark (Bruce), Crothers, Doherty, Poster (Sir George), Laurier (Sir Wilfrid), Lemieux, Lewis, Meighen, Pardee, Pugsley and Sevigny a committee to assist His Honour the Speaker in the direction of the Library of Parliament, so far as the interests of the House of Commons are concerned, and to act on behalf of the House of Commons as members of a Joint Committee on the Library.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
THE PARLIAMENTARY RESTAURANT. Sir ROBERT BORDEN moved:
That Messrs. Pripip, Pardee, Ross and Stanfield be appointed to assist Mr. Speaker in the direction of the restaurant, as far as the interests of the Commons are concerned, and to act as members of the Joint Committee of both Houses on the restaurant, and that a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint Their Honours therewith.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Correspondence respecting the control of the export of nickel.-Sir Robert Borden.
Memorandum respecting the work of the Department of Militia in respect to the European war.-Major General Hughes.
Report of the Department of Indian Affairs for the year ended March 31, 1914.- Hon. W. J. Roche.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 20, respecting the Canadian Northern Railway Company.-Mr. Bradbury.
Bill No. 21, respecting The Canadian Northern Ontario Railway Company.-Mr. Blain.
Bill	No.	22,	respecting	the	Canadian
Northern Quebec Railway Company.-Mr. Guilbault.
Bill No. 23, respecting the James Bay and Eastern Railway Company.-Mr. Girard.
Bill No. 24, respecting The Ottawa and New York Railway Company.-Mr. Fripp.
Bill No. 25, respecting The South Ontario Pacific Railway Company.-Mr. Smith.
Bill	No.	26,	respecting	The	SouthernCentral Pacific	Railway	Company.-Mr. Green.
Bill No. 27, respecting The St. Lawrence and Adirondack Railway Company.-Mr. Fripp.
Bill	No.	28,	respecting	The	Toronto
Eastern Railway Company.-Mr. Smith.
Bill No. 29, respecting The Van Buren Bridge Company.-Mr. Michaud.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. W. F. MACLEAN (South York) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 30 to amend the Railway Act.

He said: I ask leave to introduce this Bill in view of the fact that it does not appear to be the intention of the Govern-meiit, so far as we know, to introduce this session, the excellent Bill which they brought forward last year to amend the Railway Act. I propose to take two of the clauses of that Bill in the hope of having them made law this session. One relates to the capitalization of railways and will have the effect of giving control of such capitalization to the Railway Commission. The other provision gives municipalities the right to associate themselves with railway companies in the construction of bridges, so that the public may have a right of way for ordinary traffic over the bridge in addition to its use for railway purposes.
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
[Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.]

Mr. W. F. MACLEAN:: 1.	What were the exports of nickel, month by month, from July 1, 1914 to end of that year or any portion thereof; also the countries of destination.


Mr. REID:: 1.	The exports of 'Nickel, fine, contained in ore, matte or speiss', that is, the actual weight and value of metallic nickel contained in ore, etc., the produce of Canada, each month from July 1, 1914, to December 31, 1914, and countries of destination, were as follows:
To United Kingdom:	Lb.	Value.July	1,037,603	$	155,263August	421,838	64,273September .. ..	1,937,351	283,308October	1,144,477	156,139November	628,871	93,587December	791,351	118,996To Germany:	July	48,121	$	6,737To United States:	July	
.	4,007,593	$	400,759August	3,130,100	313,010September . . ..	1,242,940	124,359October	1,523,297	152,328November	2,104,495	210,540December	2,343,128	234,307


ROSTHERN, SASK., CUSTOMS.
Mr. McCRANEY:: What are the average monthly receipts of the subcollector of Customs at Rosthern, Saskatchewan, during the present fiscal year?


Mr. REID:: $204.23.


SASKATOON CUSTOMS COLLECTOR.
George Ewan McCraney: Who is collector of Customs at Saskatoon and hen was he appointed?


John Dowsley Reid: Allan Sproat, Acting Collector; employed January 4, 1915.


HORN EXTRADITION CASE.
Mr. MICHAUD:: 1.	Is the Government or the Department of Militia aware that an international bridge over the St. Croix River has been partially destroyed by dynamite by a German subject?
2.	If so, what .proceedings have been taken against him by the Canadian Government?


Mr. DOHERTY:: 1.	The Government is informed that the bridge has been partially destroyed by an explosive-whether by dynamite is not known. The Government is further informed that the individual named Horn who caused the explosion claims to be a German subject.
2.	Extradition proceedings charging the offence under Sec. 510 (c) of the Criminal Code.


I.C.R. ICE CONTRACTS.
Mr. GAUVREAU:: 1.	How many persons or companies have tendered to furnish the Intercolonial Railway with ice at Levis and Campbellton?
2.	What are their names and residences?
3.	What is the amount of the tender in each case -and the point of delivery of such ice?
4.	Who obtained the contracts?
5.	For what amounts were such contracts awarded?


Mr. COCHRANE:: 1. Nine.
For the ice required at Levis, offers were received from the following:
' J. A. Boulay, and E. Levesque, Sayabec, P.Q.. 95c. per net ton delivered and packed in ice house; 75c. per net ton freight charges not paid. J. A. Couture and E. Bolduc, Levis, P.Q., 97c per net ton delivered and packed in ice house; 64c. per net ton freight charges not paid. P. Paquet, Fils, St. Romuald, P.Q., 75c. per net ton freight not paid and transportation for men to be furnished by railway. Ulric Begin, Levis, P.Q., 70c. per net ton freight charges not paid and transportation for men to be furnished by railway. Ed. Bernatchez,
Montmagny, P.Q., 70c. per net ton packed in ice house, but railway to haul ice free of charge from Montmagny. Xavier Emond, Fils, St. Romuald, P.Q., 65c. packed in ice house, but railway to haul ice free of charge from St. Romuald.
For the ice required at Campbellton, offers were received from the following:
H. Pritchard, Campbellton, N.B., $1.45 per net ton delivered at Campbellton station. W. J. Price, Campbellton, N.B., $1.24 per net ton, delivered and stored in ice house. Thos. Ellsworth, Campbellton, N. B., $1.05 per net ton delivered and stored in ice house.
2. Answered by No. 1.
3. Answered toy No. 1.
4.	For Levis the award was originally made to J. A. Couture and E. Bolduc at 64c. per ton, but, as these parties desired to supply ice from a point in the St. Lawrence river which the District Superintendent refused to approve, the same not being considered wholesome, they declined to award; and the contract was re-awarded to the next lowest tenderers, Xavier Emond, Fils, of St. Romuald, P.Q., at 65c. per net ton.
For Campbellton the award was made to Thos. Ellsworth at $1.05 per ton.
5.	Answered by No. 4.
LAKE TEMISCOUATA POSTAL SERVICE. Mr. GAUVREAU:
What are the reasons alleged by the Postmaster General for refusing- to open a post office on the northeast shore of Lake Temiseouata, and to grant a subsidy to a new company which has been organized for the purpose of establishing communications between the two shores of said lake, thereby aiding to develop' this important district of Lake Temiseouata and Des Squatecks, in support of which two requests are said to have been made to the Postmaster General by Dr. DubS and F. X. Bdlanger of Notre Dame du Lac, and Fraserville?


Mr. CASGRAIN:: If the inquiry has reference to a request for the establishment of a post office under the name of ' Saint Dominique du Lac,' two miles northeast of Notre Dame du Lac, on the opposite side of Lake Temiseouata, the department has been unable to see its way to authorize the cost of service, considering the estimate of $150 a year to be excessive for a tri-weekly service from Notre Dame du Lac post office, which is only two miles away. Moreover, it is estimated that the revenue of the proposed office would amount to only $50 a year.
However, in an endeavour to obtain a reasonable offer, the department is inviting tenders for the service.


I.C.R.-PISH TRANSPORTATION.
Mr. SINCLAIR:: How many refrigerator cars containing shipments of fresh fish only were transported from Mulgrave, N.S., to Montreal, attached to the regular daily express train running between said points, known as The Maritime Express, during the months of November and December, 1914, and January, 1915?


Mr. COCHRANE:: Fourteen cars were
carried on the Maritime Express during the months of November and December, 1914, and none in January, 1915.


UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. E. M. Macdonald: A return showing if any official statement was given on behalf of the management of the I.C.R. to the effect that wages would be paid in their absence to the employees of the railway who volunteered for active service; if so, when and by whom. If any order has been made by the Railway Department providing for such payment, and if so, when the said order was made.
Mr. C. A. Wilson:	For a return showing:
1. How many persons have been made prisoners of war since the declaration of war between the Allies, Germany and Austria? 2. Where have they been kept captive? 3. The name of each place of detention, and the name of the officer in charge of such place of detention?
Mr. Buchanan:	For a return showing:
1. How much money has spent amongst the merchants of the city of Medicine Hat for government relief? 2. To whom payments were made and the total amount in each case?
Mr. Chisholm (Antigonish) : For a copy of all petitions, letters, telegrams and correspondence regarding a proposed daily mail service between Lower South River and South Side Harbour, Antigonish County, and improved postal accommodation for the residents of the last named district.
Mr. Lemieux: For a copy of all papers, letters telegrams, etc., concerning the purchase of the property known as the Carslake Hotel, in Montreal, for post office purposes.
Mr. Maclean (Halifax) :	For a copy of all
correspondence which has passed between the Auditor General and the Militia Department, or any other department of the Government service, in regard to the expenditure under the war appropriation Act.
Mr. Chisholm (Antigonish) : For a return showing the names and addresses of all persons in Antigonish county to whom the bounty under the Fenian Raid Volunteer Bounty Act has been paid; the names and addresses of all persons from said county whose applications have been rejected, and a list giving names and addresses of all applications from said county whose applications have not yet been disposed of.
Mr. Buchanan: For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, Orders in Council, petitions and any other documents in connections with Ihe removal of Edward N. Higinbothan from th"i position of postmaster at Lethbridge, Alberta.
Mr. Buchanan:	For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, accounts, Orders in Council and other documents in connection with

the distribution of relief to the settlers in the drouth affected districts of Alberta.
Mr. Proulx:	For a copy of the petition,
papers, documents and letters in connection with the incorporation of the Dominion Trust Company, incorporated by Special Act of the Parliament of Canada in 1912, being Chapter 89 of 2 George V.
Mr. Proulx:	For a copy of all the correspondence exchanged between the Department of Justice and the Government of the province of British Columbia, or any of its members, with regard to a certain Act passed by the Legislature of the said province in 1913, being Chapter 89 of 3 George V., entitled: "An Act respecting the Dominion Trust Company."
Mr. Turgeon: For a copy of all tenders received by the Post Office Department for the mail service between Caraquet and Tracadie, Gloucester County, N.B., on the 15th day of January last, with the names of the tenderers, the respective amounts of the tenders, and the name of the new contractor.
Sir Wilfrid Laurier: For a copy of all petitions memoranda from commercial bodies or other parties in relation to the immediate construction of the Georgian Bay Canal, and of all correspondence in connection with the same since September 21, 1911.
Mr. Turriff: For a copy of all invoices, accounts, statements, letters, telegrams, correspondence and other documents in connection with the purchase of drugs, bandages, medical supplies and other goods purchased by the Government or any department of the Government, from J. E. Powell, or from the Carleton county drug store of Hintonburg.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. T. WHITE (Minister of Finance) moved.
That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair for the House to go into Committee of ways and means.
He said:	In the Bridget speech
of August last I dealt with the commercial and monetary conditions resulting from the outbreak of war then prevailing and their probable effect upon the finances of the Dominion. With respect to the latter, I stated at the time that I put forth my views with much diffidence because it was not possible to make a forecast with any measurable degree of certainty. In presenting my statement of to-day I shall deal first with the subject of our revenues and expenditures, actual and estimated, for the current fiscal year which ends on March 31 next. In August I pointed out that we were certain to experience a sharp decline in revenue due to decreased importations attributable to the shutting-off of our trade with the enemy, the interruption and increased risk of ocean traffic, and above all the cessation of Canadian borrowings

abroad and its effect upon our purchasing power as a community.
This forecast has been realized in ampler degree than was at the time expected. Taking the ten months of the year which have already elapsed, that is to say from April 1, 1914, to January 31, 1915, the Dominion's revenue from all sources has totalled, in round figures, $109,500,000. This compares with $139,000,000 for the corresponding period of the last fiscal year, a decline of nearly thirty millions. Entering into details we find that of this heavy loss in revenue the falling-off in customs accounts for nearly twenty-eight millions; in excise two hundred thousand and in miscellaneous items a million and a half. Since the outbreak of the war the contraction in customs revenue has been fairly constant in monthly amount representing about one-third of the returns for the corresponding period of the previous year. As regards excise the additional duties imposed by the August Budget have had the effect of counteracting the heavy losses which would otherwise have been experienced.
Upon the basis of these figures for the ten months' period and having regard to the present action of the revenue-producing services, we estimate that the revenue of the Domiiiniion for the fiscal! year ending March 31 next, computed upon the present basis of duties, would amount to $130,000,000. The figures for the previous year having been $163,000,000, this year's loss of revenue wmuld reach a total of thirty-three millions.
So far as the expenditures of the year are concerned, I stated in August that it would be the policy of the Government, in the interest of employment, to maintain as far as possible the programme of public works then under construction, but that new works would not be undertaken until the financial outlook became clearer and we should have in view the source of funds from which to meet the expenditure. This policy we have endeavoured to carry out. For the ten months ended January 31, the current expenditure has reached $102,000,000 and the capital land special $37,000,000. These figures compare with $93,000,000 and $47,000,000, the outlays under the headings in question respectively for the same period of the previous year. The drop in capital and special expenditure is due to the fact that railway subsidy payments have been much less dur: ing the present year. For public works and' undertakings, our disbursements have been greater than they were last year.
For the whole of the present fiscal year we estimate our current expenditure will be $140,000,000 and our capital and special expenditure $50,000,000. Summarizing the estimated results we have the out-turn of the year, stated concisely, as follows: Current expenditure .. ..$140,000,000 Capital and special (other than war) expenditure.. 50,000,000
Total	$190,000,000
Our revenue on the present basis being estimated, as I have stated, at $130,000,000, we should have to meet for this year a deficit of ten million dollars on current account plus the entire amount of our capital and special expenditure, a substantial part of which we have in the past been able to defray out of current revenue, a balance only having been provided by borrowing. Included in our ordinary expenditure is an amount of $2,500,000 which will be required this year for the relief of distress in the drouth-stricken districts of Saskatchewan and Alberta. In addition we are making provision for about seven and a half millions or more to be expended in the purchase of seed-grain.
I have still to deal with the expenditure representing the cost of organizing, training, equipping, transporting and maintaining our forces enlisted for active service in defence of the Empire. In connection with the War Appropriation Bill presented by him at the August session, the Right Hon. the Prime Minister presented an estimate of $30,000,000 covering expenditure until March 31 next for the mobilization, equipment, transport and maintenance of an overseas contingent of 25,000 men and pay of detachments of troops on active home service. Such was the patriotic spirit and enthusiasm with vjdiich the call to arms was received throughout the Dominion and such the vigour and expedition with which the mobilization, organization and training of the troops was conducted by the Militia Department that within six weeks after the close of the session Canada had despatched a contingent of 33,000 men fully armed and equipped as her first contribution in this war to the ranks of the Empire's army. To-day there are nearly 50,000 troops in active training throughout Canada, their number being increased daily by enlistment. From this body as a permanent nucleus, constantly replenished by recruitment, further contingents will be sent forward from time to time as practicable. The estimate
[Stage Direction]


of expenditure presented in August was of course inadequate to meet the enlarged programme, and the special war expenditure during the present fiscal year will probably reach the total amount of the appropriation, viz., $50,000,000. The expenditure to date has been $38,000,000.
Taking all the foregoing into consideration, the increase of Canada's national debt for the year would probably aggregate $110,000,000. In this I am, of course, including our expenditure for war.
In addition to the expenditures to which I have referred, the Dominion has made advances on investment account under statutory authority and has met its sinking fund obligations as usual, the funds required to be found for these purposes aggregating $5,000,000. We also provided for the retirement of £1,700,000, or $8,500,000 in currency, of yearling Treasury Bills which matured in November last.
The House will from the statements I have made gather that the task of finding money for our requirements as outlined has been somewhat onerous. For four or more months after the outbreak of war international money markets^" were closed to new issues. By December, after the successful flotation of the British war loan, an easier tone prevailed and it became possible to obtain short date money in limited amounts at fairly reasonable rates. Capital was still, however, averse to permanent investment, although evidence was not wanting of improvement in that regard. Any prospect. of general resumption in this respect in Great Britain was, however, terminated by the announcement by the British Treasury authorities on January 18, that owing to the necessity of conserving the financial resources of the country during the war, fresh issues should thereafter be made only with their approval. Issues for undertakings outside the British Empire were prohibited. Issues for undertakings within the United Kingdom are to be allowed only if considered advisable in the national interest; those for undertakings in the British Empire overseas only where ' urgent necessity and special circumstances exist.
To meet our financial requirements since the August session the following steps have been taken:
We arranged with the Imperial Government for advances from September until March 31 of £12,000,000, or say $60,000,000,

of which we have received to date £8,000,000, or $40,000,000.
We issued for Dominion purposes Dominion notes to an amount of ten million dollars in excess of the additional issue of $15,000,000 authorized by Parliament at its last session. For this I am introducing special legislation confirmatory of our action.
We borrowed five million dollars from the Bank of Montreal.
We issued after the successful flotation of the British war loan £3,000,000 of six months Treasury Bills negotiated at 4J and 4J per cent and maturing in June next.
We sold at a net price of 94J £1,300,000 ($6,500,000) of our"l 940-60 stock to meet the private requirements of our investing clientele in London.
By these means we have arranged our finances until the end of March of the present fiscal year. At present we have substantial balances to our credit both here and in London.
So far as floating indebtedness is concerned, we shall therefore enter upon the new fiscal year with £3,000,000 of Treasury Bills maturing in June and a bank indebtedness of $5,000,000. Apart from -these we have no maturing loans to meet until the year 1919, a most satisfactory situation which I am disposed to attribute to the policy hitherto followed by the Dominion of financing by selling its permanent stock at such prices as could from time to time be obtained rather than by issuing short date loans in the hope of more favourable conditions developing later.
As regards our borrowings from the Imperial Government, our arrangements are that we shall pay interest at the same rate as is paid by the Imperial Treasury upon its war loans, from the proceeds of which advances are to be made to us. At such time or times in the future as may be agreed upon between the British Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Canadian Minister of Finance, a Canadian war loan or loans will be issued and the borrowings from the Imperial Government repaid. It seems to me that no fairer terms could be named than those so generously accorded us by the Imperial authorities.
Revenue and Expenditure, 1915-16.
In approaching the question of our finances for the coming fiscal year beginning April 1st next it will be advisable to give preliminary consideration to prevailing

trade conditions, because upon such conditions -will depend the amount of revenue which will be derived from all sources and particularly from customs, which is our principal mainstay in the matter of income. Since the outbreak of war there has of course teen a most serious interruption of our international trade. Commercial dealings with enemy nations have been automatically shut off. The increased risk of ocean traffic and higher freights have had their influence. The demoralization of the rates of exchange, which are now happily becoming normal, was for several months a serious detriment to international transactions.
In addition, our import and export trade was for a considerable time and is still in some degree adversely affected by the interruption of our merchant marine service through the chartering of so many steamships for the transport of our troops and tne engagement of a part of our shipping by the Imperial authorities. The falling-off of immigration, the departure from Canada of reservists and of our own contingent have also had their effect. But by far the most important factor has been the curtailment of our borrowings abroad. This has been the outstanding feature of the economic effect of the war upon Canada. Canada has been borrowing at the rate of from two to three hundred million dollars annually for some years past. For the six months preceding the war our loans abroad and principally in Great Britain aggregated two hundred million dollars, or over a million dollars a day. These borrowings represented the sale of securities by the Federal and provincial Governments, by municipalities and by railway, public utility, industrial and financial corporations. For the most part the purpose of loans so effected was to provide funds for the construction of public undertakings, works and services, railways and industrial and other plants and establishments. The war at once cut off this stream of borrowed money, and only recently have there been evidences of its resumption upon a greatly reduced scale. Until the war is over and for a considerable period afterwards it is not probable that monetary conditions will permit of the issue of securities even of the highest character other than for war purposes in any such volume as that to which we have been accustomed in the past. This interruption of the influx of capital has neces-6i
sarily meant marked curtailment of expenditure upon undertakings, works and buildings in all parts of Canada with consequent reaction upon the industries, trades and businesses furnishing, material and supplies therefor. The result has been a material slackening of general * constructional activity, considerable unemployment and attendant diminished buying power on the part of the community. Commercial houses are exercising prudence in commitments and the public generally are practising economy, that is to say they are buying less both of domestic and imported produce. The result of all this has been a rapid change in the volume of our imports and exports. For the nine months ended December 31 of the present fiscal year our total exports (merchandise only) amounted to $353,000,000 as compared with $380,000,000 for the corresponding period of the previous year, a decrease of $27,000,000. For the same nine months of the present year our imports (merchandise only) have been $391,000,000, a decline of $112,000,000 over those for the corresponding period of the previous year. Thus the ratio of decrease in our exports has been much less than in the case of our imports. The total trade for the first nine months of the present and last fiscal years was $745,-' 000,000 and $885,000,000 respectively. In 1912 the so-called adverse balance of trade against Canada was $225,000,000; in 1913, $300,000,000; in 1914, $180,000,000. From present indications it would appear that we shall to a large degree overtake this balance. In view of the decrease in our borrowings which have accounted in large measure for our excess of imports, this condition is what we should naturally expect, Our exports will, it is to be hoped, so increase as to enable us with such borrowings as may be obtained outside of Canada, to pay any trade balance against us together with our interest maturing abroad without resort to gold exports.
From what I have stated it is apparent that with the war still continuing we may expect for the year 1915-16 diminishing imports and consequently reduced revenue as compared with the present year in which there have been four ante-bellum months. Upon the present basis of duties of customs and excise we estimate that our revenue from all sources for the coming year would not exceed $120,000,000. So far as expenditures are concerned the policy we
[Stage Direction]
enunciated in August we shall continue. Our estimates contain no new items and as to items which they include we shall proceed with works not already under contract only as we feel justified having regard to the financial situation. Dealing with what we may call uncontrollable expenditure, that is to say expenditure necessary for the conduct of civil government and required to meet interest and other obligations of the Dominion, we cannot look forward to any reduction over the past year. The Dominion has large undertakings under contract fox construction. Chief among these may be mentioned terminal and harbour works and improvements in our larger port cities, the completion of the National Transcontinental railway and the Quebec bridge, the Hudson Bay railway, and the Welland canal.
We must calculate upon a Consolidated Fund expenditure of $140,000,000 and of capital and special expenditure of at least $40,000,000, making a total of $180,000,000. For investments authorized by statute we shall have to provide $4,000,000 additional. It will be necessary also to raise funds to meet the outstanding Treasury Bills to which I have referred. Our special war expenditure may reach $100,000,000 for which a special appropriation Bill will be passed at this session. Our interest charges will, of course, greatly increase from this forward. Our outlay for this year on this account will exceed sixteen millions. In next year's estimates they appear at twenty-one and one-half millions. We must also look forward to a large and increasing pension-list expenditure.
It is apparent in these conditions that we must obtain additional revenue to a very substantial amount. Assuming that our total cash requirements for all purposes whatsoever, including our war expenditure, will amount during the coming year to over $300,000,000 while our revenue on the present basis would yield only $120,000,000 we are faced with the problem of raising by additional taxation and borrowing, a sum in excess of $1801000,000. My proposals for meeting the situation are as follows.
So far as concerns our special war expenditures which may reach one hundred million dollars I should be disposed, if we had not such heavy and uncontrollable capital expenditure to meet, to recommend that we should pay at least a part of it from current revenue. But it is obvious upon a consideration of the figures which I have submitted that we shall not by any

reasonable supplemental taxation measures be able to close the gap between revenue and expenditure much less to pay a portion of the principal of our special war outlay. In the circumstances I have no hesitation in proposing to the House that we shall borrow the full amount required under this heading. Canadian Governments have always justified public borrowing for capital account on the principle that expenditure upon enterprises, permanent in their nature, enures to the benefit and advantage of future generations who may therefore fairly be asked to pay interest upon the debt contracted in respect of them. If this theory is correct, and so far as I know it has never been seriously challenged, then we need have no reluctance in borrowing to meet the expense of this war, because such borrowing is for the purpose of accomplishing for future generations that which is infinitely more precious than material undertakings, namely, the preservation of our national and individual liberty and the constitutional freedom won by our forefathers during centuries of struggle, enjoyed by us to-day and destined, we believe, to be ours for all time. It is therefore the intention of the Government to negotiate for a continuance of the arrangement which I have mentioned with the Imperial Government for the purpose of procuring the funds necessary to meet our special war expenditure.
Assuming that this can be accomplished, and I have reason to believe it can, we have still to deal with the problem of so increasing our revenue as to meet our current expenditure and at least a part, and I should hope a substantial part, of our capital expenditure. I express this hope because we shall be obliged to borrow heavily for military purposes and our interest charges upon the vast amount which will be required on this and capital accounts will mount up rapidly in terms of millions by way of fixed charge to be provided yearly.
Many suggestions for supplementing our revenue have been put forward by members of the community and in the public press throughout the country; some quite impracticable, others worthy of consideration and adoption, but, speaking generally, wholly lacking in adequacy to meet the situation which the war has so suddenly brought upon us. It is not a question of raising a few millions by stamp taxes, by income tax or other minor means of supplementing revenue. We must endeavour to

raise additional revenue to an amount of at least thirty million dollars, and when we have accomplished this we shall still be obliged to borrow heavily over the next fourteen months, that is to say, between now and March 31, 1916, to meet expenditure for purposes other than for war. We feel that the situation with which we are confronted should be resolutely met, and the finances of the country placed upon a basis which will enable us to go forward prepared to face whatever may lie before us until this war is concluded, and concluded as we would wish. In making this statement I am convinced I am but expressing the sentiments of the whole Canadian people, who will, I know, be eager to make whatever of sacrifice may be required from them during this supreme crisis in the Empire's history.
The chief source and mainstay of our revenue is the tariff, and it is to this we must look principally for relief of our present financial conditions. Taxation imposed by increased customs duties bears upon all classes, because all are consumers, and in paying additional taxation each member of the community will feel that he is to that extent contributing to the cost of the war and the defence of his country. As an auxiliary means of Raising revenue we shall resort to certain special taxes, the burden of which will fall more particularly upon those members of the community who are best able to sustain it.
To supplement our revenues to the minimum amount regarded by the Government as necessary, I shall later introduce to the House a Bill intituled 'The War Revenue Act, 1915.'
Its provisions will cover a levy of special and general taxation as follows:
Special Taxes.
Upon all banks to which the Bank Act applies, a yearly sum equal to one per cent upon the note circulation, to be computed and paid quarterly. From this taxation we shall realize approximately one million dollars.
Upon every trust and loan company incorporated under any legislative authority and carrying on business in Canada, a yearly sum equal to one per cent of its gross income derived in Canada, payable quarterly.
Upon every insurance corporation, society, association, firm or partnership carrying on the business of insurance, other than life, fraternal benefit and marine insurance, a
sum of one per cent upon all net premiums received by it in Canada. Payments to be made quarterly.
The provisions of the Bill will apply to businesses of the respective banks, trust and loan and insurance companies transacted after January 1, 1915, and the first receipts therefrom will reach Consolidated Revenue Fund about May 1.
In addition the following special taxation will be provided for:
Upon every cable and telegraph company using telegraphic cables or wires within: the jurisdiction of Canada, a sum equal to one cent upon each despatch or message originating in Canada for which a charge of fifteen cents or more is imposed. Returns to be made quarterly. The company is authorized to charge the additional toll and collect the, same from the person sending the message.
Upon every purchaser of a railway or steamboat ticket in Canada for any point in Canada, Newfoundland, the West Indian Colonies or the United Stages, the sum of five cents in respect of a ticket costing over one dollar and not more than five dollars, and
The railway or steamboat company or fractional part of five dollars which the ticket costs.
Upon every purchaser of a berth in a sleeping car or seat in a parlor oar, the sum of ten, cents in respect of each berth bought, and five cents in respect of each seat bought in Canada.
The railway or steamboat company or person selling the railway, sleep-
4 p.m. ing car and parlor car tickets referred to are required to collect the taxes imposed and transmit to the Government.
* Upon every person, firm or company carrying passengers by vessel to ports or places other than ports or places in Canada, Newfoundland, the British West Indian Colonies and the United States, in respect of each passenger the sum of one dollar if the amount chargeable for the passage exceeds ten dollars, the sum of three dollars if such amount exceeds thirty dollars, and the sum of five dollars if the amount exceeds sixty dollars. The company is authorized to collect the tax from the passenger and is required to account therefor to the Government.
In addition to the above, the fallowing stamp taxes:
Upon all cheques, receipts to banks by depositors and upon bills of exchange pass-
[Stage Direction]
ing through a bank, laj stamp tax of the value of two cents.
Upon all express and post office money orders, a stamp tax of the value of two cents, and upon postal notes a stamp tax of one cent.
Upon every letter and postal card posted in Canada, a war stamp tax of one cent.
Upon every bill of lading, a stamp tax of two cents.
Upon proprietary or patent medicines and perfumery sold in Canada, the retail price for each bottle or package of which is ten cents or less, one cent, and in addition for each ten cents of retail price, one cent.
Upon wine non-sparkling, sold in Canada, for every bottle or package containing one quart or less, five cents, and for each additional quart, five cents.	*
Upon champagne and sparkling wine-
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Mr. WHITE:: I knew that a proposal to tax its favourite beverage would appeal to the House. Upon champagne and sparkling wine sold in Canada, every bottle containing one pint or less, twenty-five cents, and for each additional pint twenty-five cents.
The special taxation to which I have referred other than that levied upon banks, trust and loan and insurance companies, *will come into force at a date to be fixed in the Act. I am making an exception to this in the case of wines and champagnes, the stamp taxation upon which will become effectual at once.
From all these special taxes we expect to raise a sum approximating 88,000,000, although there is no means of accurate calculation; my own view is from 88,000,000 to $10,000,000-I should think more likely 88,000,000 than 810,000,000. It will be observed that I have in these special taxes omitted income tax upon individuals, about which there has been some discussion since the outbreak of the war. The matter has had the consideration of the Government and it appears clear to us that such a tax is not expedient, at all events for the present. Under the British North America Act, while the Dominion may impose direct or indirect taxation, the Provinces are restricted to the former. At present under legislation existing in certain of the provinces income is subject to taxation by municipalities, and in two instances' by the provinces themselves. In other provinces no income tax exists, although in some of these a business tax in lieu thereof
.
is levied upon incorporated companies. In ordeT to bring into force an income tax the Government would be obliged to create machinery for assessment, revision and collection. This would involve a heavy expense as compared with the amount which would be realized. Taking the income tax of the United States as a basis it would appear that Canada could hardly expect to derive from a similar tax a sum in excess of two million dollars, from which would have to be deducted the heavy expense connected with its administration. My chief objection, however, to an income tax is the fact that the several provinces are also likely to be obliged to resort to measures for raising additional revenue, and I am of the view that the Dominion should not enter upon the domain to which they are confined to a greater degree than is necessary in the national interest. There is another feature of income tax which makes it unsatisfactory for the purpose of Dominion finance. I refer to the length of period which- must elapse before it becomes productive. In Britain, where the tax is the chief source of revenue to the Imperial Government, there is no municipal taxation upon incomes. There is also the important difference that in Britain taxable incomes are derived largely from investments. They have therefore a settled and permanent character, are ascertainable with fair accuracy and are capable of being levied upon at their source. With us this is not the case.
Tariff Taxation.
As our main revenue measure we propose with certain exceptions (numerous exceptions, I may say a general horizontal increase in the customs duties upon all goods and commodities imported into or taken out of bonded warehouse in Canada. The list includes all articles hitherto dutiable or on the free list, and whether raw material or finished or partly-finished product. The increase we propose is seven and a half per cent ad valorem to the general and intermediate tariffs and five per cent ad valorem to the British preferential. In	the case	of iron ore,	forreasons I shall	give	in	Committee,	theadded duty is specific and not ad valorem. In determining	the	list of exceptions,regard has	been had to	our
trade convention with France and the obligations of our agrement with certain of the British West India colonies. By reason

of the convention with France the increased customs duties will not apply to silk fabrics, velvets, ribbons, embroideries and certain other goods. The exceptions to the tariff increases I have mentioned include wheat, flour, tea, anthracite coal, fish from Newfoundland, salt for curing fish, lines, twines, nets and hooks for the fisheries, reapers, mowers, binders, harvesters, binder-twine, traction ditching machines, sugar, tobacco (dealt with in August), news-printing paper, newspaper printing presses, typesetting and typecasting machines and a number of other items of lesser consequence. The tariff upon the articles exempted from the increased duties will remain as at present. So far as concerns the duty upon raw materials it is to be pointed out that in accordance with regulations made under the provisions of the Customs Act manufacturers are entitled to a drawback of 99 per cent upon all duties paid upon imported materials used, wrought into or attached to articles manufactured in Canada and exported therefrom. In addition to making the increases mentioned for the purpose of increasing revenue, we propose to alter the existing tariff by adding squid and nicotine sulphate to the free list. Squid is used- as bait by the fishermen while nicotine sulphate is a spraying material used by fruit-growers for destroying insect pests. These two items have for some time past been noted for change.
The revenue obtained from the proposed tariff changes will be separately shown in the Trade and Navigation returns of the Department of Customs. By this we shall know the precise amount collected through the customs under the provisions of the War Revenue Act.
Upon the basis of importations for the current year and having regard to conditions which I have described as likely to prevail during the coming year we expect to realize from our proposed customs tariff legislation from twenty to twenty-five million dollars.
These, Mr. Speaker, are the proposals of the Government, having as their object the raising of additional revenue rendered necessary by the war and our participation therein as a belligerent. We are not unmindful that they will entail a considerable financial burden upon the community. We believe however that to adopt measures less comprehensive in their scope would be but to temporize with a situation with which it is our duty to adequately cope. That the people will cheerfully respond to the demands made upon their patriotism goes without saying. At the outbreak of the war it would have been premature to have brought forward measures which to-day have been long foreseen by public opinion to be necessary and indeed inevitable. It would also have been most inopportune and inexpedient by reason of the profound dislocation and disorganization of business caused by the war and the shock to financial stability which' the Dominion was so suddenly called upon to withstand.
We believe the tariff increases which we propose will be not only effectual in producing greater revenue but will be strongly efficacious in stimulating Canadian industry and agricuture and in relieving unemployment. In order to initiate the legislation necessary to give effect to the proposals I have laid before the House I beg to give notice that when the House goes into Committee I shall move the following resolutions :
Resolved that it is expedient to provide:
1.	That each bank to which the Bank Act applies, exclusive of hanks in the course of winding-up, shall pay for Consolidated Revenue Fund quarterly a tax equal to one-fourth of one per cent upon the average amount of the notes of the bank in circulation during the three months preceding, the greatest amount of notes in circulation at any time during each of the three months being the basis of the average, provided, however, that where the greatest amount of notes in circulation exceeds the amount of the paid-up capital, then an amount equal to the paid-up capital shall be the basis used in calculating the average;
2.	That every loan and trust company incorporated under any legislative authority, including the banks subject to the Quebec Savings Banks Act, 1913, shall pay for Consolidated Revenue Fund a tax of one per cent upon tae gross amount of
(a)	interest, the property of the company,
from loans and investments in Canada, and
(b)	income, other than interest, on business
transacted within Canada, received by the company on and after the first day of January, 1915 ;
3.	That every insurance company other than life and marine companies and fraternal benefit societies shall pay for Consolidated Revenue Fund a tax of one per cent upon the net premiums received by the company in Canada on and after the first day of January, 1915 ;
4.	That every cable and telegraph company shall pay for Consolidated Revenue Fund a sum equal to one cent upon each despatch or message originating at the offices of the company in Canada and transmitted thence over the company's lines for which a charge of fifteen cents or more was imposed, the company having the right to charge the one cent to and collect the same from the person paying or liable to pay the regular charges for the transmission of the despatch or message;

5.	That every purchaser of
(a)	a railway passenger ticket or right to transportation over a railway to any place in or outside of Canada,
Ob) a steamboat passenger ticket or right to transportation by steamboat between ports or places in Canada or from a port or place in Canada to a port or place in Newfoundland, the West Indian colonies or the United States,
(c)	a ticket or right entitling the passenger transportation over a railway and by steamboat to a port or place in Canada, Newfoundland, the West Indian colonies or the United States, whether such transportation be by railway and steamboat or by steamboat and railway or by railway, steamboat and railway, shall pay for Consolidated Revenue Fund, iD addition to the regular charge for the ticket or right, in respect of a ticket or right costing-
(i)	over one dollar and not more
than five dollars	5 cents.
(ii)	over five dollars-for each five dollars and in addition for any fractional part of five dollars. . 5 cents;
6.	That every purchaser of a berth in a sleeping car or seat in a parlour car shall, in addition to the regular charge for the berth or seat, pay for Consolidated Revenue Fund-
(a)	ten cents in respect of each berth bought,
(b)	five cents in respect of each seat bought;
7.	That every company carrying passengers by vessel from any port or place in Canada to any port or place outside of Canada, except Newfoundland, the West Indian colonies and the United States, shall pay for Consolidated Revenue Fund in respect of each passenger carried-
(a)	the sum of one dollar if the amount
chargeable for the passage exceeds ten dollars;
(b)	the sum of three dollars if the amount chargeable for the passage exceeds thirty dollars;
(c)	the sum of five dollars if the amount
chargeable for the passage exceeds sixty dollars,
and that the company may charge to the passenger and may collect from him the sum so
payable;
8.	That no person shall issue a cheque payable at or by a bank and no person shall negotiate a bill of exchange through a bank or deliver a bill of exchange to a bank for collection unless he affixes thereto a stamp of the value of two cents; that a cheque or other bill of exchange made or drawn out of Canada in the possession of a bank in Canada shall before payment or presentment for payment have affixed thereto a stamp of the value of two cents, and the value of the stamp shall be chargeable to the person entitled to the proceeds of the cheque or bill;
9.	That every customer of a bank shall affix to a receipt for money paid to him by the bank and chargeable against a deposit to his credit
i in the bank a stamp of the value of two cents;
10.	That every express company carrying on business in Canada shall, before the issue of a money order or traveller's cheque, affix thereto a stamp of the value of two cents chargeable to the purchaser of the order or cheque or to the payee thereof;
11.	That no money order or postal note shall
/	| Mr, W. T. White.]
be issued under the provisions of the Post Office Act until there is affixed thereto a postage stamp of the value of two cents and one cent respectively, to be paid for by the purchaser of the order or postal note, and upon such stamp there may be printed or impressed the words * war tax';
12.	That on every letter and post card for transmission by post a tax of one cent shall be levied and collected, such tax to be payable by affixing to the letter or card a postage stamp of that denomination, upon which there may be printed or impressed the words 'war tax';
13.	That every person by whom goods are received-
<a) to be exported or carried coastwise, or
(b)	to be transported by railway, shall attach to the bill of lading or other evidence of receipt a stamp to be furnished by the shipper or consignor of the value of two cents;
14.	That every bottle or package containing-
(a)	a proprietary or patent medicine,
(b)	perfumery,
(c)	wine, non-sparkling,
(d)	champagne and sparkling wine,
shall be subject to the payment of the stamp duties hereinafter set out :
Stamp of
Article.	the
Value of.
(a)	A proprietary or patent medi-* cine,
(b)	Perfumery, the retail price for
each bottle or package thereof being-
Ten cents or less	 One cent.
More than ten cents-
For each ten cents and in addition for any fractional part of ten cents	One	cent.
(c)	Wine, non-sparkling, each bottle
or package containing-
One quart or less	Five	cents.
A quantity greater than one quart-
For each quart and in addition for any fractional part of a quart	Five	cents.
(d)	Champagne and sparkling wine,
each bottle or package containing-
One pint or less	 25 cents.
A quantity greater than one pint-
For each pint and in addition for any fractional part of a
piht	25 cents ;
15.	That the provisions of any Act founded on these resolutions, in so far as such provisions relate to wine, non-sparkling, champagne and sparkling wine, shall be deemed to have come into force on the twelfth day of February, 1915, and to have applied to all such articles

(a)	imported or taken out of customs warehouse for consumption on and after that day and to have also applied to such articles previously imported for which no customs entry was made before that day,
(b)	owned by or in the possession of the manufacturer or producer thereof,
(c)	owned by or in the possession of the
wholesale or retail dealer- therein.
1.	Resolved that it is expedient to amend

Schedule A of the Customs Tariff, 1907, and to strike thereout tariff item 329 and the enumeration of goods set opposite said item, and to
provide that the following items, enumerations and rates of duties, if any, he inserted in said Schedule A:
		British Pre-	Inter-	
ferential	mediate	GeneralTariff.	Tariff.	Tariff.118a. Squid	Free.	Free.	Free.209b. Nicotine sulphate	Free.	Free.	Free.329. Ores of metals, n.o.p. . ..	Free.	Free.	Free.329a. Iron ore	6 cents.	8 cents.	8 cents.2.	Resolved that it is expedient to amend The Customs Tariff, 1907, by providing that:(1)	There shall, in addition to the duties of Customs otherwise established by Schedule A to The Customs Tariff, 1907, and Orders in Council amending Schedule A, be levied, collected and paid upon all goods enumerated, or referred to as not enumerated, in Schedule A, except as hereinafter provided, when imported into Canada or taken out of warehouse for consumption therein, the several rates of duties of Customs herein specified:
British Preferential Tariff, 5 p.c.
Intermediate Tariff, 71 p.c.
General Tariff, 71 p.c.
(2)	There shall be levied, collected and paid upon all goods enumerated as being free of duty in Schedule A and in Orders in Council amending Schedule A, except as hereinafter provided, when imported into Canada or taken out of warehouse for consumption therein, the several rates of duties of Customs herein specified :
British Preferential Tariff, 5 p.c.
Intermediate Tariff, 71 p.c.
General Tariff, 71 p.c.
Provided, however, that the following goods shall be exempt from the foregoing provisions:
(a)	goods admitted into Canada free of Customs duty under the provisions of Sections 8 and 9 of the Customs Tariff, 1907 ;
(b)	goods enumerated in Schedule C of the French Convention Act, 1908;
(c)	goods imported to be used in the manu-feature of mowing machines, harvesters, selfbinding or without binders, binding attachments, reapers, and complete parts thereof, under regulations by the Minister of Customs;
(d)	goods imported to be used in the manufacture of binder twine for harvest binders, under regulations by the Minister of Customs;
(e)	articles imported to be used in the manufacture of goods enumerated in Tariff Item 682 in Schedule A, under regulations by the Minister of Customs;
(f)	anthracite coal and anthracite coal dust;
(g)	bacteriological products or serum for subcutaneous injection;
(h)	vaccine and ivory vaccine points;
(i)	pressed felt, elastic webbing and hollow blocks of wood imported to be used in the manufacture of artificial limbs;
(j)	steel imported to be used in manufacturing rough unfinished parts of rifles, when such parts are to be used in rifles to be made for the Government of Canada;
(lc) fabrics of which silk is the component material of chief value imported to be used in the manufacture of neckties ;
(1) goods enumerated in the following Tariff Items in Schedule A:	1, 2, 3, 19, 20, 20a, 21,
22, 23, 28a, 29a, 39b, 40, 55, 60, 61, 66, 77a, 101a, 118a, 129, 132, 134, 135, 142, 143, 144, 145, 153, 164, 169, 171, 172. 173, 174. 175, 176, 178a, 180a, 184, 196, 201, 209b, 329, 329a 348a, 352a, 359, 360, 369, 373, 441, 443,. 445, 445a, 446a, 464, 466, 466a, 470, 483, 544, 544a 576' 595, 596, 676, 682, 688, 689, 689a, 690, 690a, 691,' 692, 692a, 693, 694, 695a, 696, 697, 698 699, 700, 701, 702, 703, 704, 705, 706, 707, 70S and 709.
Provided, further, that the duties of Customs collected and paid under the provisions of this Section shall not be subject to drawback under Schedule B.
3.	Resolved that any enactment founded on the foregoing resolutions shall be deemed to have come into force on the twelfth day of February, 1915, and to have applied to all goods mentioned in the foregoing resolutions, imported or taken out of warehouse for consumption on and after that day, and to have also applied to goods previously imported for which no entry for consumption was made before that day.


Mr. GERMAN:: Are the materials for the manufacture of binder twine subject to an increased duty, or are they left as now?


William Thomas White: Binder twine is free and the material of which it is made is free.


Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:: Will the minister please state the effect of these changes upon sugar?


Mr. MACDONALD:: And upon tea.


William Thomas White: Tea, sugar and tobacco are left precisely as they are to-day.


William John Macdonald: What is the article 682 of schedule A, referred to in section (e) of resolution 2?	,


William Thomas White: Fish-hooks for deep-sea or lake fishing and a line of articles of cognate character.


William John Macdonald: As to section (f),
anthracite coal, that is free now, is it not?


William Thomas White: It is free now and remains free; the additional duty is imposed upon bituminous.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, it may be fitting that I should say something as to

general economic conditions, actual and prospective. On the whole, having regard to the vast dislocation of finance and commerce occasioned by the war, the Dominion has withstood the shock exceedingly well. When we consider the immense distance we have traversed since August last in improved tone, confidence and commercial and financial outlook there is abundant cause for gratification and thankfulness. Readjustment has necessarily been a painful process for many of our industries, but it must be considered as having proceeded and as proceeding satisfactorily. The consequences of the interruption of our borrowings abroad for purposes to which I have alluded in the course of my remarks have been shown in a slackening of activity in many trades. On the other hand production in various lines has been greatly quickened and stimulated by orders on a very large scale for clothing, munitions and other equipment and material placed in Canada not only by the Canadian Government but by Britain and her Allies as well. Expenditure for supplies oJLthis character must appreciably assist in counteracting the adverse factors of which I have spoken. It will also exert a most favourable influence upon the important problem of international exchange, with which is involved the question of gold export. It is apparent that throughout the Dominion strong efforts have been and will continue to be made to increase production. The enhanced prices of grains and other products will be a great inducement to exceptional exertion along this line. The returns as to fall ploughing and general condition of land are most favourable for a record crop production next year. The intervening period we shall bridge successfully in proportion to the courage and energy displayed by our citizens in their several callings. During war-time it is the duty as well as the interest of all to multiply effort, to increase to the utmost their production, in order that wastage may be repaired and the nation kept strong for the struggle. Our farmers, tradesmen and manufacturers will no doubt more keenly study their problems and expand wherever possible the scope of their enterprise.
While one hesitates to attempt a forecast in conditions so variable and subject to sudden and violent change, it would appear that accumulations of funds with accompanying easier interest, rates and increasing confidence on the part of investors will result in a gradual resumption of the sale

abroad and at home of securities for needed expenditures on the part of our Provinces, municipalities, railways and industries. Such expenditures, even on a greatly reduced scale, together with war outlays in Canada should go a long way towards the restoration of such of our trade and industry as have suffered from the effects of the war. Above all will our commercial improvement and, for that matter, commercial improvement throughout the world, follow upon the continuing success of the Allies. With such continuance legitimate business throughout the world must improve during the remaining period of the war. Should the progress of that success be interrupted, international trade and commerce must receive a further setback. To put it another way: If the exchanges of the world were in operation as before the war any notable success on the part of the Allies would cause securities everywhere to rise; with any notable success on the part of the enemy they would fall. Happily we have no cause to be apprehensive as to the continued favourable progress and the certain ultimate triumph of the arms of the Empire and her Allies. So far as any war can be said to go well, we have every reason to make the statement -as to this the most terrible of all wars. As to its duration, it would be idle to hazard even a guess. But one thing is certain that be it long or be it short, the Empire and every part of it is determined that its conclusion must be upon such terms that the ensuing peace will be not a transient truce, not an armed and arming armistice, but a real and lasting settlement with securities amply guaranteeing the world against a recrudescence of the militarist ambition, the aggrandizing spirit, the greed of possession, the lust of conquest, which have brought about almost a subversion of our civilization.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: In accordance
with the arrangement made a few days ago, I beg to move the adjournment of the debate. I' did propose suggesting the resumption of the debate on Tuesday next, but it has been suggested to me by some hon. gentlemen on this side of the House that Thursday would be preferable, owing to the fact that the previous day, Wednesday next, is a holiday. However, I suppose it would be satisfactory for the moment simply to move the adjournment of the debate, and the exact date of its resumption can be arranged later.


Robert Laird Borden: What my hon. friend suggests is quite satisfactory. I shall be glad to confer with him with regard to the date.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and debate adjourned. EUROPEAN WAR CREDIT, $100,000,000.
Right Hon. Sir ROBERT BORDEN moved that the House go into Committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
1.	That it is expedient to provide that a sum not exceeding one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) be granted to His Majesty towards defraying any expenses that may be incurred by or under the authority of the Governor in Council during the year ending 31st day of March, 1916, for:
(a)	The defence and security of Canada:
(b)	The conduct of naval or military operations in or beyond Canada ;
(c)	Promoting the continuance of trade, industry and business communications, whether by means of insurance or indemnity against war risk or otherwise; and
(d)	The carrying out of any measures deemed necessary or advisable by the Governor in Council in consequence of the existence of a state of war.
2.	That the Governor in Council be empowered to raise by way of loan, temporary or otherwise, such sums of money as are required for the purpose of making any payment authorized by any Act founded on these resolutions.
3.	That the principal raised by way of loan under this Act and under the War Appropriation Act, 1914, and the interest thereon shall be chargeable on the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
Mr. PUGSLEY:: Before you leave the
Chair, Mr. Speaker, I would like to call the attention of my right hon. friend the Prime Minister to the fact that some days ago I asked him if he would, without a motion, lay upon the table of the House the names of the gentlemen who have been acting, or who to the knowledge of the Government or any minister thereof have been professing to act, either for the Canadian Government or for the Government of Great Britain in the purchase of supplies and munitions of war.
My right hon. friend has not yet done that, and I would like to see that done before I for one would be in a position to discuss this vote and consider, as it is the duty of the members to consider, the expenditures which have been made of the $50,000,000 voted by Parliament in the war session in August. This information ought to be furnished. There appeared in the press supporting the Government, at the end of January last, this despatch from Ottawa:
Ottawa, Jan. 15,1915.-As a consequence of the misrepresentations that have been made to business firms in the United States and Canada by persons who have fraudulently styled themselves
agents of the British and French governments, it has been considered advisable by the Government to publish the following list of purchasing agents for military purposes of the allied governments.
British-Co!. A. G. Barton and F. W. Stobart, Ritz Carlton Hotel, Montreal.
French-Hudson Bay Co., Montreal; Capt. Lafoulloux, Hotel BrSvort, New York; Direction de 1'Intendence, Bordeaux, France; M. de La Chaune, 28 Broadway, London.
Russian-Messrs. S. Ruperti and Alexsieff, care of the Russian Embassy, Washington, D.C.
When I inform you that I have information, which I think is of a most reliable character, that gentlemen went to New York not many months ago, took apartments at one of the leading hotells in thatf. city, sent letters or circulars to leading manufacturers of ammunition informing them that they were appointed to represent the Canadian and British Governments and gave orders for vast quantities of ammunition on behalf ostensibly of the Canadian and the British Governments, you will see how important it is that those members of the House who wish to examine into and ascertain the facts with regard to purchases which have been made on behalf of the Canadian and the British Governments should be informed as to those gentlemen whom the Government had in mind when they issued this notice, if it was issued, as I presume it was. There is no immediate hurry, it seems to me, for entering upon the consideration of this motion. Parliament has already voted $50,000,000 which it has been stated by the Prime Minister will last to the close of the present fiscal year. This vote of $100,000,000 is not to take effect till after the 31st of March. It, therefore, does seem to me that we ought not to be rushed along unduly with the consideration of a vote of this magnitude until we have been furnished with information to which Parliament has a right about the expenditures which have been made for war purposes. I do not at present desire to charge, it is far from my wish to charge the Government or any member of the Government with any wrong-doing in connection with the letting of various contracts; but my information is that, whereas the price of a certain kind of ammunition (the fair price even one month after the breaking out of the war) was only some $25 per thousand rounds, these gentlemen representing or professing to represent the Government gave the order and made contracts under which this Government and the British Government paid the large sum of $33 per thousand rounds; that

these orders were not confined to millions of rounds but ran into hundreds of millions of rounds. That is the information I have. I may say that in the city of New York this is current talk among members of that splendid Canadian colony who, by their enterprise and interest in Canadian affairs, are a credit to the land of their birth. Many of them hang their heads in shame at the revelations which have been given to them. They say that the Canadian Government and the British Government have been called upon to pay vastly larger sums for ammunition and other war supplies than ought to have been paid. My object and my sole object in bringing the matter to the attention of the Hou'se to-day is that the Prime Minister may have this information before him and look into this matter. All that he has to do is to send proper representatives to the city of New York and lie will have no difficulty whatever in ascertaining what has taken place there, if the information I have is correct. It may not be correct, it may be that these rumours are unfounded; but they have wide circula-' tion amongst the members of the Canadian colony in New York; they are generally talked about, gentlemen there claim to have absolute knowledge of the truth of what I am stating. I wish to give one illustration which is to be found at pages 38 and 41 of the paper laid on the' table of the House by the Minister of Militia. We find that whereas ammunition was supplied. by the Dominion Cartridge Company, a Canadian concern, for the price of $31 a thousand rounds, which was a high price, for identically the same ammunition, to be delivered at the same place, in the city of Quebec, there was paid in the United States $33 per thousand rounds. This may or may not be confirmatory of the truth of the statements which are made in New York. At all events it is a singular fact, and one w oi thy of the attention of the Government, that a larger price was paid for ammunition in New York, namely, $33 per thousand rounds, than was paid to a Canadian company, which furnished identically the same ammunition delivered to the same place at $31 per thousand. But my information is that a fair market price for this kind of ammunition in the United States, when these gentlemen, representing or pretending to represent the Governments of Canada and Great Britain, appeared upon the scene and succeeded in bringing about, as I am informed, a combination among the manufacturers, was $25 per thousand rounds; yet 
the Government of Canada has been charged, as appears here in the report submitted, $33 per thousand, and the British Government has been charged the same price, or $8 per thousand more than was a fair market price at the time when these gentlemen appeared upon the scene and brought about a combination.


Robert Laird Borden: What was the time to which the hon. gentleman alludes?


William Pugsley: Some time in the fall of 1914. I do not wish to suggest for a single moment that there has been any wrongdoing on the part of the Government; but in view of what is professed to be almost common knowledge among Canadians in New York, I am sure that if, through these gentlemen who have been given credit by the Minister of Militia or some other member of the Government, the British Government or this Government, have paid much higher prices for war supplies than they ought to have paid, it is a subject which demands the immediate and most serious consideration of my right hon. friend the Prime Minister and his Government. It would be bad enough, it would be condemned by the Canadian people, it would be reprehensible, if gentlemen representing Canada had gone to the United States and succeeded in making only the Canadian Government and people pay more for ammunition in these times of stress than they ought to have paid; but it is worse when these gentlemen, by reason of having credit from the Canadian Government, have succeeded in making the British Government also pay a very much larger sum than ought to have been paid. The contracts of the British Government which have been secured in this way are not confined to one, two, five, or ten million rounds of amunition. One contract alone called for the enormous amount of 200,000,000 rounds, so I am informed; and if you take the extra charge of $8 per one thousand rounds, on that contract alone the British Government paid $1,600,000 beyond the fair market price for ammunition at the time these gentlemen acted as go-betweens between the manufacturers and the Government. My information is not at all of a confidential nature. The facts are professed to be generally known in the city of New York by those who keep in touch with Canadian affairs.
I recognize that it would be impossible for the Opposition in this House to get the


IX, 1915
[Stage Direction]
necessary information without the co-operation of the Government. It would be impossible for even a committee of this House to get that information without the Government's co-operation, for the subpoenas of the committees of this House do not extend beyond the limits of Canada. The facts can only be got through the co-operation of the Government, and I have no doubt that if the Prime Minister institutes the proper inquiries he will be able to ascertain the truth of these allegations, which I make by reason of information given to me from a source which I am obliged to accept as reliable. If, as my right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition suggested in his remarks upon the Address, a committee of this House were appointed consisting of members of both sides and of some member or members of the Government who could speak with the authority of the Canadian Government, and to a very considerable extent with the implied authority of the British Government, I am sure there would be no difficulty in ascertaining the facts in regard to the purchase of this ammunition and other war supplies.
I rise for the purpose of urging that before this resolution is considered in committee the Government should lay on the table of the House the names of those gentlemen who it has ascertained were improperly claiming to represent this Government and the British Government, as well as the names of the gentlemen who had authority from either this Government as a whole or from any member of this Government, whether the Minister of Militia or any other minister.
Mr. SPEAKER:: I understood the hon.
gentleman rose to ask a question. As I have not had an opportunity of presenting the resolution to the House, I may state that the question before us is the motion of Sir Robert Borden that I do now leave the Chair for the House to go into committee to consider the resolution.


Robert Laird Borden: I suggested to my right hon. friend that we might pass this resolution pro forma without any discussion, and I understood him to assent. I understand my hon. friend from St. John (Mr. Pugsley) objects to that, and I shall therefore withdraw the motion.


William Pugsley: I do not object. My point was that the names of these gentlemen should be laid on the table of the
House before the resolution is considered in committee.


Robert Laird Borden: Oh, I did not understand. As far as my hon. friend's observations are concerned, I am not prepared to speak to-day on the number of rumours concerning war supplies which he thinks ought to be brought to the attention of the Government, for I did not know that a discussion was coming up on this subject. But I venture to say this: that if the British Government bought with the assistance of this Government any ammunition in New York City or anywhere else, the price was first submitted to them and they were asked whether it was a fair price which they would be prepared to pay. As to what is a fair price for ammunition, I have no such personal knowledge as my hon. friend professes to have. I venture to isay that he will find that a price higher than that which he has named has been paid by the British and Allied Governments since the outbreak of war. That is my recollection, and I know that a very considerable effort has been made by some of the Allied Governments to get ammunition. I told my hon. friend the other day that we would give any information in the possession of the Government with regard to persons authorized to purchase war supplies. I intended to give that and would have given it before the matter came up irr committee, without the long discourse which my hon. friend has made upon the subject, and I repeat to him now that all available information will be given in due course before the matter comes up in Committee.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the House went into committee on the proposed resolution. Mr. Sevigny in the Chair.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: Has my right hon. friend (Sir Robert Borden) any information to give now?


Robert Laird Borden: No, I have no information. I did not purpose giving the information at this stage, in view of the arrangement which had been made.


Wilfrid Laurier: I think the
discussion might take place upon the second reading. Perhaps it would be well for the committee to rise and report progress. I would ask my right hon. friend to see that at the next sitting of the House, when we take this up again, we have all the information we asked for the other day.


Robert Laird Borden: Yes.
Progress reported.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
On the motion of hon. W. T. White for Committee of Supply:
['The British Columbia caseacting on what we believe to be the decision of the Privy Council, which decision is applicable quite as much to Quebec as to British Columbia, and having also the strong opinion of the Department of Justice to the effect that it is the proper position to take, felt that it was our duty to assert the rights of the Dominion in these tidal waters. I feel, however, that the matter is one in which the province of Quebec honestly maintains the position that it upholds at the present time and that the question will therefore have to be settled in the courts. If there is no agreement in the meantime, next year somebody will be fishing without a license from the Dominion Government, our officers will probably arrest him and have him fined and no doubt an appeal will go to the courts, or it may be taken up in another way through action by the Province of Quebec. It is not desirable that this matter should be left in a state of doubt and uncertainty and it is desirable that a stated case should be placed before the Privy Council as soon as possible. I am pleased to say that since this correspondence took place, within the last day or two, there has been some communication on the subject between the Attorney General of Quebec and the Department of Justice in Ottawa, and there is every reason for thinking that a conference will be held in a short time at which the matter will be discussed between the two Governments and some course taken which is reasonable and proper under the circumstances.']
Wilfrid Laurier: We cannot
discuss Supply to-day.


Robert Laird Borden: We cannot take it up except by consent. I thought we might take Civil Government.


Wilfrid Laurier: We are not
prepared to discuss Supply to-day.


Robert Laird Borden: Do you wish to go through the motion paper?


Wilfrid Laurier: I have no
objection.
WAR	CONTRACTS-TENDERS FOR



[Stage Direction]
On the motion of Mr. Sinclair for a copy of all tenders for army stores that have been received and dealt with by the Department of Militia and Defence since August 1, 1914:
John Howard Sinclair: I would ask this to
stand. I explained to you yesterday, or the day before, Mr. Speaker, that I had been informed that it would be difficult for the Department of Militia and Defence under the pressure at present to furnish me with all the information I have asked for in this motion. I was also informed that information was to be brought down by the hon. Minister of Militia and Defence (Major General Hughes) within a day or two which would probably furnish me with a great deal of the information asked for and I asked to have this motion stand until the Minister of Militia brought down the information.
Motion allowed to stand.
spondence is very little indeed, but what I rose to say to my hon. friend was that, if he desires me to bring down the letters from the fishing bounty officers enclosing the terms of the bounty claims, there are some 27,000 of these, and I do not suppose that is what my hon. iriend wants. I would like my hon. friend to let us know .lust what he wants and if he does so I will be glad to bring down all the correspondence tb :re is.


Mr. KYTE:: I had not that in mind. My object was to get any instructions which had been given to the inspectors previous to the taking up of the bounty claims.
M. HAZEN: There have been practically no instructions, but such paper's ae there are will be brought down.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

William Pugsley: For a copy of all correspondence relating- to the purchase of, a:;i] payment by the Government for two Submarines authorized by Order in Council dated the 7th August, 1914, and of any other Order or Orders in Council relating thereto; and also of all reports received by the Government or any Department thereof referring to said Submarines.
He said: I find that these two submarines were purchased pursuant to an Order in Council dated the 7th of August, 1914, which appears upon page 20 of the blue book entitled Documents relative to the European War. The Order in Council is as follows:
The Committee of the Privy Council have had before them a report, dated 6th August, 1914, from the Minister of the Naval Service, submitting that, in view of the existing emergency, it is necessary to provide some additional means of naval defence on the Pacific coast of Canada. The minister states that two submarine boats have been offered to the Dominion Government; that these boats were originally built for the Chilian Government which was unable to receive them, and that their dimensions are as follows-


FISHING BOUNTIES.
George William Kyte: For a copy of all correspondence with, a: instructions issued, to fishery officers in No-Scotia during the year 1914, relative to flshi: bounties payable to fishermen in respect of fl caught during the year 1914.


Mr. HAZEN :: No instructions- were is^ sued to fishing bounty officers in 5 p.m. Nova Scotia during 1914, with the exception of the standard instructions which are embodied in circular letters and sent out every year. The other corre-
Giving the displacement, length, beam and speed. The order proceeds:
The technical officers of the Department of the Naval Service report that these boats are very suitable and recommend their purchase. The minister concurs and recommends, therefore, that these boats be purchased for the sum of $1,050,000, and that, as the necessity is urgent, a Governor General's warrant be issued covering this expenditure, the Minister of Finance having reported that there is no parliamentary appropriation from which this expenditure can be defrayed. The Committee advise that a Governor General's warrant do issue as recommended accordingly.
(Signed) Rodolphe Boudreau, Clerk of the Privy Council.

There are two singular facts connected with this Order in Council which I think my hon. friend the minister will feel desirous of explaining to the House. The first is that the price fixed by the Order in Council is $1,050,000.


John Douglas Hazen: The price was $1,150,000.


William Pugsley: The minister will agree that the amount was actually $1,150,000. Therefore it would seem that when that Order was passed, the minister thought that $1,050,000 was the amount paid for the submarines. I do not find any other Order in Council correcting this, although this report was brought down, I think at the session which opened on the 18th of August; but my hon. friend will no doubt, if there is another Order in Council, call our attention to it. Another important statement which I think requires explanation is as follows:
The minister states that two submarine boats have been offered to the Dominion Government and that these boats were originally built for the Chilian Government which was unable to receive them.
From that statement one would assume that for some reason or other-financial, I would suppose-the Chilian Government was not able to take delivery of these submarines.
That is a fair inference from the statement of the minister contained in that recommendation to Council. My opinion is, that so far from that being the case, the Chilian government had rejected these submarines, that they had a naval expert present at Seattle where the submarines were completed, and that expert, after the tests were made on the 26th of July, declined to accept the submarines, claiming that they were not in accordance with the specifications and were not properly built. I' cannot think that my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, had he knowledge of that fact, would have made such a statement to Council. My hon. friend and I do not always agree, and when we are in our own home town we differ markedly on some questions. Perhaps one of the most important questions on which we differ has reference to the building of ships. I did all that I could, when I was in the ministry, to secure the building of war vessels in Canada. The fact that they were going to be constructed in St. John did not prevent me from being enthusiastic over the project; I- have not been afraid to do anything I could for my own constituency. My hon. friend, for reasons that seemed
good to 'him, has taken the opposite view, and has done all he could to prevent the building of war vessels in Canada. I do not now criticise his course, nor do I argue which of us was right. 1 have no doubt he thought he was right, and I am sure I was right. But, as I have said, I do not think he knew, when he made that recommendation to Council that these submarines had been rejected by the expert of the Chilian government. It shows that somebody must have been pulling the leg of the minister and that gentleman lived in the province of British Columbia. I think that when I give all the evidence which I have bearing on the subject, evidence which comes from British Columbia, and which I think is to be relied upon, it will be seen that that gentleman-who may properly be called the sixteenth member of this Government, though he is not yet sworn in; I refer to Sir Richard McBride-I say I think the House will agree that he was not exactly fair or frank with my hon. friend the minister when he induced the Government to make the purchase of the submarines. Not but that it may have been advisable-as to that I do not know-to purchase these submarines at a fair price. But I think my hon. friend would not have asked Council to purchase submarines of a somewhat obsolete character, the construction of which had been entered upon some three years before, and which had taken an unconscionably long time to build-for they could ordinarily be constructed by a good shipbuilding plant in from eight to ten months. But, as I have said, when my hon. friend was induced to purchase these submarines at a price of $1,050,000, or $1,150,000 which is the sum to be paid though it is not what is stated in the Order in Council, he was induced to do something which, I think, he would hardly have done had he had full knowledge of all the facts.
There appeared in one of the leading Seattle newspapers, the Sunday Times, of 26th July last, an article with reference to these submarines, which I think will 'be of interest to the House. This newspaper, I am informed, has a wide circulation both in Victoria and in Vancouver, and we may well presume that statements published in it would >be pretty well known to the people of these cities. The article is as follows :
Chile rejects fighting craft launched here-
Two submarines made in New Jersey and
put together in local yard reported as unsuitable.
Iquique and Antafogasta, submarine war

craft built in Seattle by the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey for the Government of Chile, at a cost of more than ?1,000,000 will never be known in future history as great sea fighters defending the honour and welfare of the people of the South American republic. They have been officially pronounced undesirable by the Chilean naval commission, of which Captain Charles Plaza, of the Chilean navy, is chairman. They will not be accepted by the Government of Chile, says Captain Plaza.
The two underwater destroyers, built at the shipyards of the Seattle Construction and Dry-dock Company assembfed, rather than built, to bo speaking with technical accuracy were launched with great eclat and with impressive ceremonies. They have been about three years in building. All the material was made in the east by the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey and shipped to Seattle, and the two war crafts made fit for service in the local shipyards, under the personal and official direction of the representatives of the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey.
Captain Plaza determined, in the recent trials at Bellingham, that the trouble with the Iquique and the Antafogasta is that they are overweight and not of sufficient and quick acting buoyancy as to justify their acceptance and this makes it practically certain that his government will sustain his adverse recommendation.
In a carefully guarded statement, Captain Plaza completely absolves the Seattle Construction and Drydock Company from any responsibility whatever for the failure of the Iquique and Antafogasta to meet the requirements of the Naval Department of the Republic of Chile.
It is known that the local shipbuilding company merely assembled the two submarines. Every part of them, practically, was either made in the East and shipped out here or was fabricated in Seattle under the specifications and drawings prepared by the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey. Therefore, the responsibility of the local shipyards was not more than that of a man instructed to put a hat in a bandbox.
Captain Plaza, who, as chairman of the Chilean Naval Commission has been in Seattle for months past in connection with the building of the submarines and whose written report advising his government against the acceptance of the Iquique and the Antafogasta has been mailed, said last night:
' I can only confirm the report you have, that the two submarines built here for my government have not been accepted and that at this time they do not meet the full requirements of the contract between the government of Chile and the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey.
Inasmuch as my report has not yet reached my government, I cannot disclose its contents, nor can j give you the facts upon which the commission acted in advising against the acceptance of the submarines.
You are authorized to state, however, that the disagreement is a matter entirely between the commission of which I am the chairman and the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey and does not in any way involve the Seattle Construction and Drydock Company, which built the destroyers for the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey and according to the direc-

tions of the representatives of that company on duty here.'
Considering all the angles in the case it is evident that the incident of the rejection of the Iquique and Antafogasta will cause a mild sensation in Coast shipbuilding as well as in naval circles. It is apparent, however, that aside from the discovery that the two submarines lack the proper buoyancy to make certain their safety and efficiency, they are considerably out of date as to style and pattern. They were designed several years ago, and it is known they do not compare with the type of submarines now building here and elsewhere for the United States Government. In fact, it is understood, were the two submarines satisfactory in point of safety and efficiency, they would scarcely measure up in standards of destructive power, speed and other requirements to the submarines recently built or on the ways in various ship yards of the country.
Because of the absence from the city of President R. J. Patterson, of the Seattle Construction and Drydock Company, and of T. S. Bailey, local representative of the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey, no official statement could be obtained yesterday from the builders' and designers' point of view.
What recourse, if any, the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey has against the Chilean Government is not known, but it is shrewdly guessed that the company, which owns the so-called Holland patents, will charge the experience up to profit and loss.
In Bellingham Bay, several months ago, as The Times then exclusively told, the Iquique, during her preliminary trials, while partly submerged, ran afoul of a boom of logs towing in the harbour. Her plight was a serious matter for a period of two hours or more, because of the fact that the master of the tug was unaware of the fact that his tow had hooked the upper works of the diving destroyer, thereby imprisoning the craft, so to speak, and likewise confining the officers and crew within her steel body in such a manner as to menace their lives.
Before any real harm had been done the master of the tug ascertained that he was mixed up in a peculiar and embarrassing situation with the submarine, and measures were promptly taken to release her and to permit her crew to handle her in their own way.
This is the report of Captain Plaza, chairman of the commission appointed by the Chilean Government to make an examination of these submarines, to witness the test to which they were subjected and to determine whether or not they were acceptable. As this newspaper states, Captain Plaza in reporting to his Government refused to recommend the acceptance of the submarines. That was on July 26. I am informed from British Columbian sources that Mr. Patterson was the chairman or president of the company in Seattle which was putting together the parts of the submarines.
I am informed that upon the rejection of the submarines by the naval expert of the Chilean Government this gentleman imme-

diately went to Victoria and interviewed Sir Richard McBride. Presumably Sir Richard McBride communicated with this Government on the subject-of course we shall have the correspondence if this motion is carried-and it appears that in the course of a few days Sir Richard McBride purchased the submarines on behalf of the British Columbia Government, the cheque of the British Columbia Government being given in payment of the purchase price. That is a matter which I think my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries ought at some time to explain to the House. If this Government found it desirable to purchase these submarines, I think it will be a matter of interest to know why the Government did not purchase them direct from the builders, and why it was left to Sir Richard McBride to take the extraordinary step of making a purchase in the name and on behalf of the Government of British Columbia. As one who has had some correspondence on the subject, it looks to me as if this Government was hesitating about purchasing the submarines and Sir Richard McBride took it upon himself to force the hand of the Government by purchasing them himself on behalf of the British Columbian Government, knowing right well that when he had gone that far his influence with this Government would prevent the ignoring of his recommendation and would obviate the danger of the Government of British Columbia being placed in the very awkward position in which they would have been placed if they had become the owners of these submarines.
It appears that a few days afterwards these submarines were brought over to Victoria, and subsequently, on August 7, an order in council was passed for their purchase. As I have said, in its terms the sum of $1,050,000 was mentioned as the purchase price. It was not stated that the submarines had been rejected by the naval expert of the Chilian government; my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries merely reported to His Royal Highness thiatt the Chilian government had been unable to receive them. That order in council says that technical officers of the Department of Naval Service reported that these boats were very suitable and recommended their purchase. So far as is known in Victoria, no naval experts from the department at Ottawa had any opportunity of examining these boats before they were purchased, and my information is that no such examination 7
was made. However, I have no doubt that the correspondence will show what these reports were. I take it that my hon. friend cannot treat that correspondence and those reports as private, and that he will bring them down as part of the return which will be submitted.
It is important that the Government should examine into all the facts in connection with this purchase. It is stated by many people and believed by many people on the Pacific coast that this company was not paid either $1,050,000 or $1,150,000 for these submarines. My information is that two cheques were passed, one of which, for the sum of $900,000, was issued to the company which built the boats. The other cheque may have been issued bona fide to a proper party, but the feeling in the public mind-among many people in British Columbia, at all events-is that somebody got a commission on the purchase of these submarines. I do not know whether or not that is so, and I make no charge in that respect, but I do say that having regard to the fact that these submarines were rejected by the naval expert of the Government for which they were built; that the builders had no market for them, except Sir Richard McBride on behalf of the British Columbia Government; that the boats were reported to be obsolete and not according to the specifications and that the naval expert of the Chilian government reported adversely upon them, it is an extraordinary thing that the price paid for them was equal to the price at which two of the most modern and up-to-date submarines could be purchased. I say that is an extraordinary fact, and it does seem to me that if those who were acting in the purchase of those two submarines had been anxious to do so, they could have purchased them at a very much lower price than that which was paid for them. My assumptions are based upon what is recognized out on the coast as public knowledge; based upon newspaper reports and statements of persons familiar with these submarines.
The fact that the purchase price was divided into two sums, one for $900,000 and one for $250,000, lends colour to the suspicion entertained on the coast that a considerable portion of this money did not go to the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey, which had the contract with the Chilian government for the building of these two submarines. As a further evidence that there can be no truth in the statement contained in the Order in Council-which I assume the



Minister of Marine and Fisheries placed in the recommendation to Council without full knowledge of all the facts with regard to the Chilian government being unable to receive the boats-the Chilian government, the moment this thing was closed up and they found that they were freed from any responsibility of litigation with this company, gave an order for two up-to-date submarines and those two are now, I am told, under construction, showing that their failure to take the submarines over was not due to inability on their part to receive them but to the report of their naval expert that the vessels were not up to specifications and entirely unsuitable and obsolete.
The motion also asks for any reports which have been made with reference to these vessels at the time of purchase and also since they have been in the ownership of this Government. In this connection I am told that one of these submarines has been in the drydock practically ever 3ince they were purchased and that recently a great portion of the side of one of them has been stripped out and that new machinery was installed. I can understand that that might be done in order to put in lighter machinery to prevent the boats from being over-burdened. I am told that the difficulty is to keep them at the proper level. They are overweighted and will sink down very much below the depth at which, for ordinary purposes of navigation or service they ought to be kept. No doubt my hon. friend will bring down any reports he may have on these subjects. With regard to the general question of purchasing submarines to form part of the Canadian navy I would assume that the coBrespondiencc I am asking for will give full information. I myself am very much in favour of adding submarines to the Canadian navy. It is a matter of great rejoicing to me that we have upon the Statute book an Act known as the Naval Service Act of 1910 which would enable the Government to have submarines built and to add to the Canadian navy a class of vessels vhich this war has already demonstrated is of the very greatest possible value for the protection of our harbours and for attacking larger vessels which might attempt to invade our coast. My only regret is that there should be any question as to the suitability of these submarines for the purpose for which they were bought. It is a well known fact that

for some fifteen months there have been in Canada shipyards well adapted for the building of submarines and larger vessels as well. Submarines could be built to-day, and for a considerable period could have been built, at the magnificent shipyards at Maisonneuve, near Montreal, where there is one of the finest ship-building plants to be found in the world. They could be built at Esquimalt where there is a dry-dock and a shipyard as well. They could be built at Levis, where Mr. Davie has a very fine ship-building plant, not suitable for the building of large vessels, but entirely suitable for the building of the submarines. They could be built at Halifax, where there is a dry-dock and a ship-repairing plant, but we know it is very easy, by a little enlargement, to convert a ship-repairing plant into a ship-building plant. I am sorry to say they could not be built at St. John, but my hon. friend knows the reason why, and we need not refer further to that. Up on the Great Lakes at Port Arthur there is a splendid dry dock and shipyard, built under a contract which the late Government made while I was minister. Submarines could be built there. It might be that under the Rush-Bagot treaty, unless by the consent of the United States, we could not turn out more than one at a time, but you know at least two vessels of a certain tonnage are allowed on the Great Lakes. Even if they could not be put together there, all the parts could be brought down to Montreal and Quebec and assembled. I think this correspondence, when we get it down, will show that a strong argument was made by Sir Richard McBride in order to induce this Government to act, and to act promptly and buy the two submarines, even although they had been rejected by the naval experts of Chili. I take it that the papers will show a very strong argument in favour of adding submarines to the Canadian navy.
I was pleased to observe the other day in Canada, a paper published in London, a despatch from Montreal, or from New York originating in Montreal. I am sorry the Minister of Militia is not in his place. The despatch is as follows:
A telegram received in New York from Montreal, according to Reuter says: To meet the exaggerated stories published in the United States, the Canadian Militia Department has authorized the statement that there is no reason why the facts concerning the construction of submarines in Canada should not be published. They are as follows: The keels of eight first-class craft have already been laid down by the Canadian

Vickers Company here and it is expected that several will he ready in August next. The plant is running at full capacity.
I would ask the Minister of Marine and Fisheries if that statement is correct?


John Douglas Hazen: As to whether the Militia Department authorized the statement I do not know.


William Pugsley: As to the fact?


John Douglas Hazen: As a matter of fact, I think submarines are being built by the Canadian Vickers at Montreal.


William Pugsley: For whom?


John Douglas Hazen: I presume for the British Government.


William Pugsley: What hon. gentlemen on the other side do not know when they do not want to know is beyond comprehension. Is the censorship on my hon. friend? Has Mr. Cook or Mr. Hamilton got charge of him to see that no information can get out? The matter is very important indeed, and I would think that my hon. friend would be able to state with some definiteness whether it is correct or not, and also inform me how far he would feel I ought to go in discussing this matter. I should like my right hon. friend to intimate after recess whether the Government feel that I could, without injury to the public interest, discuss the building of these submarines at Montreal. Personally I do not think there would be any harm in it, for it is now a matter of common knowledge and has been discussed in all the newspapers of the United States and England, which profess to have published the news on the authority of the Minister of Militia.
At six o'clock, the House took recess.
The House resumed at eight o'clock.


William Pugsley: Mr. Speaker, I will not detain the House very much longer. There is, however, one matter in couinection with the purchase of submarines which I omitted to mention, and in regard to which I trust the report to be brought down will give the House the information, and that is as to the contract price of these submarines with the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey. I take dt for granted, Sir that before paying this large sum of money for new submarines the Government would inform itself as to what was the contract price which the Chilian government were paying. I am informed on authority which
n
I believe to be reliable that the original contract price was- $387,000 for each submarine. That made the original contract for the two submarines $774,000. I am told that after the contract was entered into an extra torpedo tube and some other-extras were provided which brought the. contract price up to $900,000. My information is from the Pacific Coast. We can well understand that when the unusual circumstances occurred, of Sir Riehard McBride, as Premier of British Columbia, purchasing these vessels, there would be a good deal of discussion and eventually a good deal of information would leak out to the public. The information, which I have is that cheques were issued, one of which went to the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey for the sum of $900,000 which is said to have been the contract price for these vessels and the extras which was to be paid by the Chilian government, provided, of course, that they were up to the specifications. I would hope that my hon. friend would be able to give satisfactory evidence to the House as to the circumstances under which these two cheques were drawn, and also that the report will show what was the contract price with the Chilian government.
Now, I desire to repeat that I am particularly anxious to have the correspondence brought down and to see it and I am sure that my motion will commend itself to the House if for no other reason than to see what arguments are presented in favour of having a fleet of submarines for Canada. 1 am entirely in favour, as I have said, of increasing the Canadian navy by the addition of a number of submarines for the protection of our coasts. If my hon. friend the Minister of Finance and the members of the Government will pardon me for saying so, I would observe that I myself am unable to see any valid reason why submarines should not be built in Canada for the Canadian Government and to form a part of the Canadian navy. The Government has asked for a vote of $100,000,000 for war purposes, to be used for the defence of Canada in connection with the army or navy. Let me say to my hon,. friend, who I presume will favour the House with a few remarks after I have got through with the observations which I shall make, that, speaking for myself-and, I know I can speak for my honoured leader because he has made a statement to that effect to the House, and I believe I can speak for the whole Liberal party of Canada as represented in this House-this

hundred million dollars will be cheerfully voted to the Government for the purpose of assisting in the defence of Canada and the defence of the Empire. Let me express the hope that a part of that money at all events will be used for the purpose of constructing submarines to be used by Canada and placed, of course during the war, if the war should be that long continued, at the disposal of the British Government. If it is necessary to add $10,000,000 or $20,000,000 to that amount I am sure that this House will cheerfully grant the additional sum.
There is no reason in the world, it seems to me why vessels should not be built in Canada for the Canadian navy. There is no obstacle in the way now that I can see. The late Mr. Monk was opposed, as I understood, to this policy. My hon. friends need not be afraid of their once beloved and powerfully ally, Mr. Bourassa, because he does not count for a great deal to-day with the Canadian people. My friends, Mr. Pelletier and Mr. Nantel, have been provided for and whatever obstacle their views might present as against a Canadian navy has been removed. My hon. friend the Secretary of State (Mr. Coderre) has gone into a pleasant office where he will not want to say anything contrary to the views of the Government. My hon. friend the Minister of Inland Revenue (Mr. Blondin) has also gone into a position where, I think, he will be very well satisfied to carry out the views of the majority, and the hon. member for Dorchester (Mr. Sevigny) has been put in leash so that he is not likely to present any serious objections to whatever course in the interests of the Empire may be decided on.
Let me say to my hon. friends: Come to us and let us join together to build up as well as we can a Canadian navy which will be able to defend our coasts in case of attack by an enemy. Although we trust that peril may not arise, still we ought to be prepared for whatever peril may come to us. Let us join together in building up a Canadian navy in defence of Canada and of the Empire. I am sure that in any course which hon. gentlemen in the Government may take, towards the better ensuring of our defences and ensuring the welfare of the empire either upon the land or upon the sea, they will be heartily supported by the members of His Majesty's loyal Opposition on the floor of this House, and I believe throughout this whole Dominion.


John Douglas Hazen: 
William Pugsley: Who sent that message?


John Douglas Hazen: That is from our Naval
station at Esquimalt and it was sent either by Captain Hose, the captain of the Rainbow, if he at that time was senior officer there; or if he was not there, it was sent by Lieutenant Pilcher, who would have been the senior officer in command of this Naval station, unless there happened to be some ship there with an officer senior to him in command.


Wilfrid Laurier: Who signed the message?


John Douglas Hazen: It is signed, as all these
messages are signed, " Esquimalt Yard." That is the way in which such official messages are signed, just as a message coming from the Admiralty is signed " Admiralty." That message came from one of our officers, and I am Sure any one will assume that a Naval officer of rank, qualification and experience, before telling us that he can purchase two submarines ready for action, with torpedoes on board; that the Chilian Government cannot take possession; that he considers it most important to acquire them immediately; will have made careful inquiries into the facts. As a matter of fact, as an officer of the Naval Department, he knew every detail in regard to these two submarines that were then at Seattle and

was able to speak with authority with respect to them.
That was on August 3. The naval department immediately took steps to gain further information. I consulted the expert advisors of the naval department of whom a number are men not only of ability but of experience in naval affairs, and their opinion was in favour of purchase. On the 4th of August, and before our decision had been reached, the Prime Minister received this telegram from Sir Richard McBride:
Sir Robert Borden,
Prime Minister, Ottawa.
Victoria, B.C., August 4, 1914. After consultation with Burrell and naval officers, have advanced to-night $1,150,000 to Lieut. Pilcher, senior naval officer in command, for purchase of two modern submarines lying Seattle harbour built for Chile. All arrangements completed for their arrival Esquimau to-morrow morning, unless untoward incident occurs. Congratulate Canada if this operation successful on acquisition of such usual-
I presume that this is a misprint for ' useful.'
*-adjunct for defence of country.
R. McBride.
This telegram was in cipher, and I have this certificate signed by Mr. A. E. Blount, private secretary to the Prime Minister:
I hereby certify that the above is a true and accurate transcription of cipher Canadian Pacific telegraph message received by the Prime JUinister from Sir Richard McBride.
We have therefore the recommendation of our own naval officers at Esquimalt, and the recommendation of the naval advisers of the Department of Naval Defence, and also the advice of Sir Richard McBride residing at Victoria, a comparatively short distance from Seattle, where the submarines'were, and who might be presumed to be in possession of accurate information with regard to them. And this telegram of his is sent after consultation with the naval officials in Esquimalt. On these recommendations, I think, we should have been justified in buying the submarines, but we were not content with that. I caused a despatch to be sent to the British Admiralty. Hon. gentlemen know that the officers of the British Admiralty, are familiar, down to the smallest detail, with every ship of war that is being built in any part of the world. At least, that was true up to the time when war broke out. There may be ships building in Germany to-day, guarded from espionage, concerning which the British Admiralty have not such information, but I think I am right in saying that 
up to the breaking out of the war the officers of the British Admiralty would have accurate information about the details of every vessel building in any part of the world for any government. The reply I received from the Admiralty on the 5th of August was as follows:
London, August 5, 1914.
Your message Chilean submarines is recommended purchase by Canadian Government if they can be manned by Canada.
Admiralty.


William Pugsley: Can the hon. minister give the telegram he sent to the Admiralty?


John Douglas Hazen: I cannot, I am sorry to say. I only had this file sent over this evening, and I cannot find the telegram here. However, it will be among the papers brought down.


William Pugsley: That is important.


John Douglas Hazen: Certainly. There is not the slightest desire to keep it back. It was a cable telling the Admiralty about these submarines and asking for advice. They advised the purchase, if we could man them. We found that we could man them. We were singularly fortunate in having in Esquimalt a gentleman who was in the British navy and experienced in submarines. There were also two or three retired officers of that class living in Victoria. With their assistance we manned these submarines, and had our crews practising day after day, as they are doing still, according to the information we have received.


William Pugsley: What is the date of the telegram to the Admiralty?
Mr. HAZEN. It was the 4th of August.


William Pugsley: What was the date of
Sir Richard McBride's telegram stating that he had purchased the submarines?


John Douglas Hazen: , The 4th of August.


William Pugsley: What is the date of the telegrams sent by the Admiralty?


John Douglas Hazen: The 5th of August.


William Pugsley: So, Sir Richard Mc-
Bride purchased these submarines before their purchase was recommended by the Admiralty?


John Douglas Hazen: Not a doubt about it,-and before war was declared. And let me say to my hon. friend that it was a most fortunate thing that Sir Richard McBride did so. For, even as it was, an attempt was made to recall these submarines after they

had left Seattle. Fortunately, they had got outside the territorial waters of the United States and were able to get to Esquimalt. A delay of even a few hours in purchasing these submarines would have meant that we should not have had these vessels for the defence of our cities and coasts on the Pacific; and without that defence, there is no telling what might have occurred.
Now, let me say to my hon. friend that we have no information that the Chilian government had refused to take these submarines. Our information, as contained in the telegrams, is that they could not be delivered to the Chilian government. Our information was that there were financial difficulties which made it impossible for the Chilian government to take possession of these ships and so the builders were seeking for purchasers. But I desire to say to the House, that even if I had had that information, in view of the information I received from the British Admiralty, I would have gone on and purchased these ships; that is, I would have accepted the recommendation given by the British Admiralty in preference to any other recommendation, or statement or information, that might have been given in regard to them. It has been a most fortunate thing that we acquired these submarines. Ask any man on the Pacific Coast what he thinks has been the result of these submarines being there. Ask the naval officers of the department in Ottawa what the moral effect of the presence of these submarines has been. These officers tell me that the fact that there were submarines on our Pacific Coast ready to go out and do battle in front of Victoria, Vancouver or Esquimalt would be known to German cruisers on the Pacific Coast, like the Dresden, the Lipzic and others, and they would not venture in to make an attack, knowing that they might be met by a torpedo from a submarine. These German vessels on the Pacific Coast were of 3,400 tons, about the same size as the Rainbow. The Rainbow single-handed might , have been able to engage any of them, except for the fact that she is slower that these German vessels, and if she had been the. sole defence of the coast cities and left without the very valuable aid of these submarines, there would have been far greater danger of an attack. We have known that these cruisers were not very far from the coast of British Columbia. We have information, accurate information I believe, that one of them went as far
north as Prince Rupert, no doubt watching the trade route to Canada across the sea. In the opinion of every naval man, the presence of these submarines in British Columbian waters not only had a splendid moral effect, but they would have rendered splendid defensive service had the occasion . arisen. The information we have from day to day is that the men on these vessels are doing and can do good work. Our reports are to the effect that these submarines, while perhaps not the moist modern or of the highest class, yet are able to give defensive service .as efficient as submarines owned iby any nation and were the best that could possibly be obtained.
My hon. friend has been listening to a lot of idle talk. Some one told him that one of these submarines had been kept in the drydock ever since it was purchased and that the other is so badly damaged that it is now laid up for repairs with its side torn out. That cannot be the case. I will simply read to the House the report which on the 9th of February, two days ago, was received from the Esquimalt dockyard with regard to these submarines, concerning which we have been receiving daily reports. It is as follows:
Naval, Ottawa, Ontario.
Night report. Both submarines of our own exercised and returned to harbour.
The circumstance that they had exercised and returned to harbour that night is hardly compatible with the fancy tale which my hon. friend has had poured into his ears and which he has narrated to this House to-day, to the effect that one of the submarines was so badly injured that its side had to be taken out and that one of them has been in drydock almost ever since it was purchased.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend has
misquoted me. I did not say that the submarine had been so badly injured that it had to be put into drydock; I said my information was that she had been put into drydock ostensibly for the purpose of making changes in her machinery.


John Douglas Hazen: I do not wish to misquote my hon. friend or do him any injustice, but he certainly conveyed to my mind the meaning that one of these boats had been practically useless from the time of purchase and that one of them was very badly injured and is now laid up in drydock with its side torn out. But here we have the statement made on the 9th day of, this month in the form of the ordinary report


William Pugsley: When was the $1,150,000 actually paid?


John Douglas Hazen: Before that, I think.


William Pugsley: Before the amending order?


John Douglas Hazen: The date is not very material, but these facts will all appear from the correspondence.


William Pugsley: It was of course paid out without authority, but that is merely technical.


John Douglas Hazen: Yes.


William Pugsley: The amending order is not printed in the file brought down.


John Douglas Hazen: This perhaps was not printed. I am reading this because my hon. friend said he was not able to find any Order in Council correcting the mistake that was made, and I am showing him that the amending order was passed on the 29th of August. There is no objection, as I have said, to bringing down the papers. I am sorry my hon. friend sees fit to insinuate charges of such a serious character against Sir Richard McBride, when a perusal of the papers would have satisfied my hon. friend that such insinuations and charges were without foundation. The papers will be brought down at an early date and laid on the table of the House. I invite my hon. friend's careful scrutiny of every transaction in regard to the matter, and of everything the Naval Department has done in
connection with the purchase of the submarines. I am sure he will come to the conclusion that his suspicions are ill-founded, that the transaction is beyond suspicion or reproach in every respect, and is to the very best interests of this country during the crisis in which we are engaged, and that Sir Richard McBride, instead of being the subject of criticism and condemnation, is deserving of the praise of the people of Canada for the prompt and excellent measure he took to further safeguard the interests of the people on the Pacific coast.


Right Hon.   S@: I think my hon.
friend the member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley), upon reflection, will come to the conclusion that it would have been better for him to have obtained the papers first and made his speech afterwards. The reason for the course he has adopted perhaps may be his suspicion that if he saw the papers first he could not have made the speech and indulged in the insinuations which we heard from him this afternoon. As far as the Government are concerned, I entirely concur in what has been said by my hon. friend the Minister of Naval Defence (Mr. Hazen), that if the hon. member for St. John has any charge to make with regard to this matter, we shall welcome him to make it, and give him the investigation he desires. As far as we	are concerned the
facts are precisely as my hon. friend the Minister of Naval Service has said. A communication was received on the 3rd day of August when we had secret telegrams leading us to believe that war with the Empire of Germany in the immediate future was highly probable. The Minister of Naval Service came to me and spoke to me about the telegram which had been received from the Esquimau Naval Yard. We conferred upon the matter and I said to him that as the sum pf money involved was large it would be wise for us to consult the Admiralty first and see whether or not they would recommend the purchase. If Sir Richard McBride had not taken the action which he did the submarines could not have been purchased by Canada and the security they have afforded to the Pacific coast would not have been available. I would like to remind hon. gentlemen in this House, and my friends from British Columbia will remember it, that there was grave apprehension at one time on the Pacific coast as to an attack

from that very same squadron which afterwards sunk two British ships in the southern Pacific. We knew at the time, at least we had reason to believe at the time, from information gathered by the naval officers on the Pacific coast and also from information afforded to us by the Admiralty, that the German ships in the Pacific which afterwards constituted the fleet I have alluded to were endeavouring to come together. They were not together at the beginning of the war but their plans were so -well laid and their means of communication so well arranged that they did succeed in coming together and defeating a British fleet much inferior in power, with a loss of two British ships. Four gallant young Canadians went down with Admiral Craddock and bis crew in that disaster. There was reason to believe at the time that those German ships were intending to come north. I know it was the belief of the naval authorities on the coast, and I think also the belief of the Admiralty, that they intended to come north, and I have telegrams from personal friends of mine in Vancouver pointing out that considerable apprehension was felt as to an attack; in fact one very old personal friend of mine in British Columbia, not Sir Richard McBride, suggested to me that it would be better to not have any defences at all at Vancouver or Victoria and to rely on the observance by the German fleet of the Hague Convention which forbade an attack on an undefended place. I replied that I had not that same confidence in the observance by the Germans of the Convention and that we would, at Victoria, at Vancouver and everywhere else, perfect all the defences we could and fight it out to the end if they did attack us. I may tell the hon. member for St. John that two British ships, one of them the Rainbow, another a cruiser, I think the Newcastle, and a Japanese cruiser which happened to come to our Pacific coast at that time, together with those two submarines for which my hon. friend has such a contempt, were prepared and were ready and made their preparations to go out and fight that German fleet if they did come off the coast of British Columbia. You can imagine the unctuous air of moral indignation that would have been displayed by the hon. member for St. John if we had failed to get those submarines. No one would 
have been louder in his criticism upon the Government if we had neglected what I believe was our duty in that regard. I conferred with the Minister of Naval Defence. He sent a telegram to the Admiralty. The next morning we received from Sir Richard McBride this telegram:
August 4.
After consultation with Burrell and naval officers have advanced to-night one million one hundred and fifty thousand dollars to Lieut. Pilcher, senior naval officer, in command for purchase two modern submarines lying Seattle harbour and built for Chile. All arrangements complete for their arrival Esquimau to-morrow morning unless untoward incident occurs. Congratulate Canada if this operation successful on acquisition of such useful adjunct defence of country.
R. McBride.
We were so close to the great event of which we had notice a little before nine o'clock on the evening of August 4th that it was doubtful whether or not we could get the submarines, because, as hon'. gentlemen in this House may know, there is a difference between the international law with regard to the sale of a war ship and that which prevails with regard to the supply of ammunition and munitions of war generally. So we had to get those boats out of American territorial waters before the declaration of war, and owing to the promptness, activity, and patriotism of Sir Richard McBride, we succeeded in securing them as a very great aid to the defence of the Empire. In reply to Sir Richard McBride I sent the following telegram on the 5th day of August, 1914:
Sir Richard McBride,
Victoria, B.C.
Yesterday morning- we communicated with Admiralty as to advisability of securing two submarines mentioned and as to feasibility of manning them as without crew they would be useless. They advised purchase provided crews could be secured. As this has been accomplished we appreciate most warmly your action, which will greatly tend to increase security on Pacific Coast, and send hearty thanks. Please advise us of their arrival.
R. L. Borden.
As far as the Government is concerned, that is the whole story with regard to these submarines. I may, however, add that Sir Richard McBride afterwards sent me a copy of the official cheque which was issued by the Finance Minister of the province of British Columbia, as a souvenir as he expressed it, of what had been done with great promptness and great vigilance by the Government of that province.

The cheque is issued to the Premier of British Columbia, who endorsed it to the order of Henry Byng Pilcher, Lieutenant R. N., and bears the endorsement of Lieutenant Pilcher,
I regret that my hon. friend from St. John should have taken the course he1 has. It seems most undesirable that any hon. member of this House should seek to depreciate the value of any submarines, ships of war, or war munitions of any kind that have been acquired by the people of this country for their defence. I repeat, it is a most undesirable course for my hon. friend or any other member of this House to take. I do not know what we may expect from him next. Shall we have an attack upon the guns that have been sent forward with the Canadian contingent?


William Pugsley: The boots.


Robert Laird Borden: My hon. friend is quite willing to make an attack upon boots. I think he will find his efforts in that regard, as in other respects, absolutely bootless.


William Pugsley: The boot will be on the other foot, I think.


Robert Laird Borden: Perhaps my hon. friend changes his policy as often as he changes his boots, for this afternoon he expressed great willingness to vote $100,000,000 when two years ago he stood up in his place and resolutely fought 9 p.m. against that aid which would have been of vital importance in the present struggle.


Mr. M. CLARK:: Might I ask my right hon. friend a question? I am sorry he should have made a remark like that in the course of this debate. If he is going to make that class of remark I should like to ask him to substantiate the statement he has made, that my hon. friend from St. John (Mr. Pugsley) ever expressed a willingness to spend $100,000,000 now on naval aid. I should like to ask another question, whether he or we wanted the Pacific defended two years ago?


Robert Laird Borden: In any observations I make on these questions I shall be governed very largely by the attitude of hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House, and I want them to understand that if there is going to be a fight and recriminations on these questions it will not be a one-sided fight. As far as the Pacific is concerned, I suppose that if the British Navy were increased by a number of useful and serviceable ships there would be a better opportunity to have the Pacific coast or any other part of His Majesty's defences adequately defended by naval force. That is what I would say in reply to my hon. friend from Red Deer. As far as the whole matter is concerned, the debate has been brought on unnecessarily and with provocation by my hon. friend the member for St. John.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh.


Robert Laird Borden: The tone which he adopted in the debate from the first was one which was intended to provoke and apparently intended to induce exactly the kind of debate that has ensued. We are perfectly prepared to conduct this session on the lines laid down by my hon. friend from Red Deer the other day, but if there is going to be attack upon us from the other side of the House, we are quite ready and prepared to carry the war into the enemy s camp.


Mr. G. H. BARNARD (Victoria, B.C.):: I regret that I was not in the House before 6 o'clock when the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley) opened the debate upon this question. I have, however, had an opportunity of perusing the " Hansard " notes of what he said with reference to the purchase of the submarines in question. As far as I recollect he made two objections to that purchase: the first as to quality, the second as to price. I should not have intervened in this debate had it not been for the fact that I may possibly give my hon. friend some information in regard to the purchase of these boats which will not be found in the papers-possibly information that he does not want to get. Before doing so I just wish to say to him that I do not think his friends on the Pacific coast will feel grateful to him for the motion he has made to-day and his remarks in support of it. The burden of his complaint is that the submarines are no good; that they were rejected by the Chilian Government because they were obsolete; that one of them-I am speaking from my recollection of the " Hansard " notes-has been in dry dock ever since it was purchased and has been absolutely useless.


William Pugsley: I did not say that one had been in dry dock ever since it was purchased. I said, almost ever since.


George Henry Barnard: I accept the correction. I want to tell the hon. gentleman that in

both particulars his information is absolutely wrong. From personal knowledge I know that'those ships have, ever since the 4th of August, been constantly patrolling the straits of Juan de Fuca and protecting the entrance waters to Victoria and Vancouver-two cities which, I may say in passing, are, at least in my opinion, finer than any he has in his native province.
Now in regard to the quality of those ships. The hon. gentleman says they are obsolete. I want to tell my hon. friend the facts as they have been given to me. We were extremely fortunate on the Pacific coast in that we had residing amongst us a number of retired Royal Naval officers. One in particular who is to-day in command of the two submarines and of the parent ship, the Shearwater, is a lieutenant who happened to have had six years' experience in submarines on the North Sea. He had only retired from the Royal Navy twelve months ago; in fact so recent was his service in the Royal Navy that he was not even on the retired list. He *was on what is called the active leave list. Directly war was impending and before it was declared, he was ordered to report to the nearest naval station which happened to be at Esquimalt. The senior naval officer in command there, Lieut. Pilcher, immediately told him that he wished him to stay for the present as he needed his services. That was before he had any knowledge that there was any possibility of obtaining the submarines at all. Lieut. Bertram Jones is the gentleman's name. When it was decided to purchase these ships Lieut. Jones went out and brought the ships in. Lieut. Jones overlooked these ships and he told me himself, personally, that they were better and more modern submarines that any he had ever served on, and he had left the Royal Navy only twelve months ago. The day before I left Victoria to come to Ottawa to attend the present session I had the pleasure of going on board the submarines. I may inform my hon. friend that neither of these submarines was in the dry dock. They were lying in Esquimalt harbour beside the parent ship. Lieut. Jones, the officer in command-and I want my hon. friend to realize that he is the man who goes out sailing these ships, who dives them and who risks his life in them-said to me when he took me over them: I want you, when you go to Ottawa, to tell the admiralty authorities at Ottawa in what fine condition these vessels are. He pointed to the torpedo tubes and said: These tubes are loaded with war heads ready to go to

sea at any moment, we are prepared to do our be^t to account for anything that may come, and we can handle these vessels and handle them satisfactorily. That officer has not been allowed to leave these ships, or at least he had been allowed no shore leave for the past three or four weeks prior to when I left Victoria on account of some apprehension that occasion for the use of these vessels might arise.
In regard to the statement that these vessels have been placed in the dry-dock, I will venture to say without fear of contradiction, that with the exception of painting or cleaning, neither one of these vessels has been in the dry dock since they were purchased, and excepting also, as the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries has told us, during a couple of weeks back m November or the beginning of December when information was received by the local authorities that there was the possibility of a filibustering expedition or a bomb-dropping attack of some kind. As to the efficiency, the working and quality of these Ships, I say they are good and modern vessels, and vessels that will give a good account of themselves if they get the opportunity.
When these vessels came they were manned by men of the Royal Naval Volunteer Force, a force composed of citizen sailors of the town of Esquimalt and the city of Victoria, and I want to pay a well-deserved tribute to the valour and patriotism of the men who were prepared to go on board and undertake work of the most perilous kind in naval warfare-that is submarine work. They are entitled to the highest credit for the work they have done.
In regard to the facts concerning the purchase of these vessels, I know that my hon. friend from St. John is not nearly so much interested in the question of the efficiency of the ships as in the possibility of finding something wrong about the purchase. I can assure him that there was absolutely nothing that either he or anybody else could find any fault with in connection with the purchase of these vessels. On the 1st of August, which was a Saturday, the hon. Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Burrell) happened to be in the city of Victoria. He was in my office about eleven o'clock in the morning when I received a telephone message from Sir Richard McBride. Sir Richard McBride told me that Captain Logan, who is the agent on the whole of the Pacific coast for Lloyds

underwriting agency, a very responsible citizen and a very upright man, was particularly anxious to see Mr. Burrell. Sir Richard McBride did not even say what he wanted to see him for, but he asked me if I would see that Captain Logan should get immediate access to Mr. Burrell if he came to my office. Of course I acceded to the request; Captain Logan came over, he saw Mr. Burrell and myself and he told us that there were these two submarines at Seattle that were available for purchase. Mr. Burrell and I, with Captain Logan, at once went to the naval yards at Esquimalt, where we found Lieutenant Pilcher in command. We told him about these submarines and asked him if they would be of advantage and if he thought it would be advisable to try and purchase them. He said that he thought it would. Thereupon the telegram which my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries has read to the House was seht. Mr. Burrell happened to be staying in my house, and next morning at half past three he and I were called to the naval yards with Captain Loga,n for a further conference with Lieutenant Pilcher on the question of the purchase of these submarines. It was arranged that Captain Logan should go over to Seattle that day and see what could be done. At the very first interview between Captain Logan, Mr. Burrell, myself and Mr. Pilcher, Captain Logan told us verbally that he thought the price would be about $375,000. In our presence he telephoned to Seattle, got Mr. Patterson, the man who had the control of the sale of these vessels in Seattle, and at that time Mr. Patterson told him over the telephone that the price would be $575,000 apiece or $1,150,000 for the two.
The price was stated in the presence of Mr. Burrell, Lieutenant Pilcher and myself. There was never any question as to what the price was to be; it was absolutely settled at that time. A telegram was sent to Ottawa-


William Pugsley: When he thought the
price would be about $375,000 each, did he state on what he based that?


George Henry Barnard: Not to my recollection. That was his first statement, before we went down to see Mr. Pilcher at all. What happened was this: He rang up long distance, -and got Seattle on the telephone. He said:	"Your price is $575,000?" Then I
heard " What? $575,000?" And the man said " Yes."


William Pugsley: What date was that?


George Henry Barnard: Saturday, the first of
August. On Monday Mr. Burrell had to leave for the East. Monday was the third and war was declared on the night of the fourth. Ottawa was communicated with and did not reply very promptly. The naval yard had information that war would probably be declared at any moment. The consequence was that delay was dangerous. Had, of course, Sir Richard McBride or the Dominion Government followed the policy of our friends opposite, the policy which is so enthusiastically supported by the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugs-ley) when he delayed for eighteen months in letting his contract after he had all his tenders-


John Douglas Hazen: Six months.


George Henry Barnard: Well, six months, it is all the same. It was just as bad, as it turned out for my hon. friends opposite. Had they followed the policy of my hon. friends opposite, the chances are that the vessels would never have been obtained No definite reply having come on August 4, in the afternoon Sir Richard McBride said:
' I am going to take these submarines and I think Ottawa will back me up.' Accordingly he authorized the purchase and issued a provincial Government cheque. Lieutenant Jones went out; looked over the submarines; passed them; handed over the cheque and brought the submarines in. On the morning of August 5, the United States cruiser Milwaukee came out from the harbour of Bemerton into the strait of Juan de Fuca looking for these submarines with the idea of taking them back, but the cruiser was about two hours too late.
My hon. friend seems to think there is something wrong in regard to the question of price. This Mr. Patterson to whom I refer is the general manager of Moran's shipyard at Seattle. I do not know that the question of responsibility particularly interests the hon. gentleman, because, of course, when he begins to cast insinuations, the responsibility of the person .against whom he casts them does not seem to worry him very much. I would like, however, to state for the benefit of other hon. members that Mr. Patterson is a responsible man, a man of high honour and standing in the city of Seattle. In the corres-

pondence on the subject matter of this purchase, I find a letter from oir Richard McBride in which he speaks as follows in regard to Captain Logan:
His connection with the purchase of the submarines at Seattle is quite easily explained. Through his business relations with ship owners and builders on the coast he ascertained that there were two completed submarines in the shipyard of the Seattle Construction and Dry-dock Company, built for the Chilean Government but for which that Government could not pay. He reported to me and X took upon myself the responsibility of asking him to examine them to undertake the negotiations for their purchase. War was about to be declared and there was not a moment to lose and not another qualified man available. The moral effect of the quick action necessary was in itself sufficient to justify what X did. I turned over to the construction company a certified cheque of the Government for over a million dollars, confident that the federal authorities would recognize the wisdom of the transaction and reimburse the provincial treasury, which they very readily did.
If my hon. friend were to travel to either the city of Victoria or the city of Vancouver, where both Captain Logan anu Sir Richard McBride are pretty well-known, and make the insinuations against them that has made in this House, he would find he would meet with more than a cold reception. For my own part, my connection with this transaction was very small; but small as it was, it has been and will be a matter of great gratification to me that I was able to be present when the transaction was entered into. When the hon. gentleman chooses to make such Insinuations against Sir Richard McBride, I simply wish to hurl them back in his face and to tell him if he ever, during the whole, course of his career, does such a patriotic action, he will stand a good deal higher in the estimation of the people of Canada than he does at the present time.


William Pugsley: I suppose I ought to be very thankful to my right hon. friend the Prime Minister for letting us on this side of the House know that if we have the audacity to attack the Government, we must look out for ourselves. In other words, if we have reason to believe that some persons, not members of the Government, not members of this House, have made secret rake-offs in connection with the purchase of war vessels or of ammunition and we dare to breathe it in this House, our action will be resented by hon. gentlemen opposite. _ They will take it as showing that we are influenced by partisan spirit and they will endeavour to make the country

believe that in some way or other we are obstructing them in doing their part in connection with this war. They will not terrify me and I do not think they will terrify any other hon. member on this side of the House. The Prime Minister, the Minister of Marine and Fisheries and the hon. member for Victoria (Mr. Barnard) have set the example of making partisan speeches. I have not done so. Has it come to this that, because Canada is engaged in war, we are not to bring to the notice of the House or of the Government any wrong-doings, as to which we have had notice, and which we believe ought to be investigated in the interest of the people of this country? If the people of Canada are prepared to spend their last dollar and to make every possible sacrifice in the interest of the Empire, we are not satisfied that there shall be any waste of public money. My hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries charged me with improper conduct this afternoon when I spoke of the purchase of ammunition in the United ' States. If the people of Canada will condemn the Government if they do not investigate any facts brought to their notice from which presumption of wrong-doing can be drawn, one hundred times stronger will be the condemnation of the people of Canada if through agents appointed by this Government-I care not whether with the knowledge of this Government or not the wrong-doing shall	take	place-there
has been money	filched from the
treasury of the mother country. And Sir, would we be doing our duty, not merely as members of the Opposition but as members of this House, if we took any course but that which we are taking? I appeal to hon. gentlemen opposite-I appeal to the hon. gentleman opposite who, a few days ago, at a meeting of the Horse-breeders' Association, declared that there was graft in the purchase of horses, who stated that those who purchased horses might be good at playing marbles but they were not good in the purchase of horses. The atmosphere of this country, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, is reeking with stories of corruption by people who have been buying supplies for the Government.
I can say that without making any charge or insinuation against a member of this Government or this House. We know very well that when these large expenditures are taking place it is difficult for the Government to watch every expenditure. They

have to appoint agents, not only for the purchase of horses, but for the purchase of ammunition, motor-trucks, blankets, shoes and all kinds of war material, both in this country and in the United States. They cannot he supposed to watch all the purchases. And when we bring to their notice the fact that we have evidence which leads us to believe that there is this wrong-doing and ask them to take action, is it to be charged against us that we thereby are guilty of partisanship? My hon. friend (Mr. Barnard), and the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and the Prime Minister also, have made the charge against me that I insinuated that Sir Richard McBride had been guilty of taking the difference between $900,000, paid to the Electric Boat Company, of New Jersey, for these submarines and the $1,150,000 which the Government paid. The minister has said that the Government of British Columbia actually paid out $1,150,000. Who denied it? I did not dispute that fact. With emphasis which was great even for him, my hon. friend said that the amount of $1,150,000 was actually paid to the British Columbia Government? Who denies it? But what became of the difference between $900,000 paid to the contractors for the construction of these submarines and the $1,150,000 which was paid first by the Government of British Columbia and afterwards paid to them by the Government of Canada?


George Henry Barnard: Did the hon. gentleman hear the Prime Minister read the cheque by which Sir Richard McBride paid over $1,150,000 direct to the contractors?


William Pugsley: No, it was paid by the British Columbia Government to Captain Pilcher. It is a matter of deep regret for me to know that Captain Pilcher is out of his mind.


George Henry Barnard: He is not.


William Pugsley: I am told he is. What are the facts as to this gentleman's state of health?


John Douglas Hazen: Does the hon. gentleman say that $900,000 was paid to the company in New Jersey, and that that included all the costs, including the assembling of these vessels on the Pacific coast?


William Pugsley: My information is that $900,000 was the entire contract.


John Douglas Hazen: The hon. gentleman might state the source of his information.


William Pugsley: It comes from a very
reliable gentleman in British Columbia, let me say with all due respect to my hon. friend from Victoria, not less respectable, not less truthful, not less honourable, than my hon. friend, and that is saying a great deal, for I would believe my hon. friend as to any fact of which he has knowledge. The difficulty about what my hon. friend has said is this, that he has no expert knowledge of these submarines, but nevertheless he has given us to-night very valuable information; That information is that when the expert, Lieutenant Jones, was asked to advise with regard to these submarines, he stated that in his opinion they could be bought for $375,000 each.


George Henry Barnard: Lieutenant Jones had
absolutely nothing to do with the price and knew nothing about it. He was the man who went out and examined-


William Pugsley: Yes, I beg pardon; it
was Captain Logan. I thank the hon. gentleman for the correction; it would have been unpardonaDie if I had not got the name right. It "was Captain Logan, the agent for Lloyds than whom, as my hon. friend for Victoria said, there would be no better judge in these matters-


George Henry Barnard: I did not say that. He does not know anything about submarines; he is a mercantile marine captain.


William Pugsley: At all events he was
asked what he thought the price should be, and die gave the figure I named. As hon. gentlemen know, Seattle is not far from Victoria, and there is a daily steamer running back and forth. The people_of the two cities keep close in touch with one another and their business relations are very intimate. Captain Logan, who would have information on the subject, thought these submarines could be bought for $375,000 each. The correctness of that statement is confirmed by the statement which the hon. member for Victoria has kindly furnished us this evening. Remember, this was the 3rd of August. My information is that this was not the first occasion when Mr. Patterson came to Victoria to consult Sir Richard McBride with regard to the purchase of these vessels. He came over on the 27th of July, the day after the tests were made at Seattle and the inspector of the Chilian government had stated that he would not recommend their purchase by his Government. A telephone message was sent to Seattle somewhere between the 26th of July,

when the adverse report was made by the Chilian naval inspector, and the 3rd of August. Whether Mr. Patterson had it understood with anybody as to the price which he would name or not, I do not know, but certainly it is a singular fact that the price ascertained by telephone was about $400,000 greater than Captain Logan stated would be, in his judgment, a fair price for these submarines. If there was wanting any circumstance to cause the Government to investigate this matter, it is the statement of my hon. friend as to the valuation put upon the submarines by this expert, Captain Logan, who was called in for consultation with reference to the matter.
I should like to know when I made any insinuation that Sir Richard McBride had received this $250,000? I did not do so. I have great respect for the intelligence of Sir Richard McBride, and I would not for a single moment suggest that, having paid out $1,150,000 of the money of the people of British Columbia, he would be guilty of taking back this large amount of $250,000 and putting it in his own pocket or using it for an election fund. We all admit that my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works knows how to run elections, but who for a single moment would suggest that the Minister of Public Works would besmirch himself with the handling of election funds? Who would imagine that Sir Richard McBride would do so? But Sir Richard McBride and this Government have their friends in British Columbia, and if any one were disposed to take advantage of it, here was a magnificent opportunity. Here were two submarines, valued by Mr. Logan at $375,000 each, the price of which according to the original contract to build was only $387,000 each. They had been rejected by the expert of the government of Chili. War was on, and public opinion in British Columbia demanded that these boats should be purchased at any price. Oh, Sir, what a temptation tnere was for those in the Conservative party who would like to wipe the Grits off the face of the earth, and who know so well how to use campaign funds in order to do so. What a temptation there was to take advantage of the situation. I do not, upon the information which has come to me, charge the minister with wrongdoing, nor did I do so from the beginning to the end of my address. I do not charge Sir Richard McBride with wrong-doing; I

did not do so from the beginning to the end of my address.


John Douglas Hazen: Did the hon. gentleman not distinctly say that Sir Richard McBride had pulled the leg of the Minister of Naval Affairs? What other meaning can be attached to that, if the hon. gentleman is correct, than that Sir Richard McBride is party to a conspiracy to defraud the country?


William Pugsley: I am glad my hon.
friend asked that question. Sir Richard was in favour of having sorpe naval defence on the Pacific coast. He had urged that repeatedly; in that respect he has been at one with us on this side of the House. He was most anxious to secure these vessels, because of the advantage that would accrue to him in his own province if he could have two war vessels-not so good as the Rainbow, but two additional war vessels- nevertheless, upon the Pacific coast. The Government here was hesitating; apparently they had hesitated for six months. According to the statement made by the Prime Minister at the August session, he and this Government had had reason to believe that war would soon take place between Great Britain and Germany. Hon. gentlemen will remember that at the August session he said that as early as January last he began to organize the different departments so that they would be ready to take action when war broke out, yet for six whole months Sir Richard McBride was obliged to look on and see this' Government apparently indifferent to naval protection upon the Pacific coast. Therefore he was most anxious that these vessels should be secured. He knew that if he wired the Prime Minister that the vessels had been rejected by the naval expert of the Chilian government, this Government would be guilty of additional delay before making the purchase. Therefore he did not convey that information and this Government was led to believe that for some reason or other the Chilian government could not pay for the vessels. I ask my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries if he honestly believes today that they were rejected because the Chilian government was not able to pay for them?


John Douglas Hazen: It certainly is my belief, and it is the belief of the officials of the Naval Department.


William Pugsley: Then, my hon. friend and his department had better study the wealth and resources of Chili. It is one of the wealthiest countries upon the American continent; a country with great resources; a country with a large revenue; a country which is amply able to pay not merely for two submarines, but for twenty or for fifty if they want to do so.
I repeat that immediately after these submarines were got out of the way the Chilian government gave an order to a shipbuilding firm in the United States for the construction of two submarines of a modern, up-to-date type, which would be serviceable in case of war. Upon reflection, does my hon. friend not think that he ought to have been informed that these submarines were rejected by the Chilian government? Oh, he says, we telegraphed the British Admiralty, and, after Sir Richard McBride had committed us to this purchase by paying over the money, we got a favourable answer from the British Admiralty, who are constantly in touch with war vessels in all parts of the world, and would know about these particular vessels. Does my hon. friend think that he is acting fairly by this House when he seeks to make hon. gentlemen believe that? Would the British Government or the British Admiralty have any knowledge of the testing of these vessels at Seattle on July 26? Would they be likely to have any such knowledge? Not at all. See the position in which my hon. friend was placed by reason of the fact that the report of the expert of the Chilian government was withheld from him. He did not inform the British Government of that circumstance; he informed them-and I take it for granted that he believed it to be true-that for some reason or other the Chilian government were not able to pay for these submarines, and that here was a chance to get two splendid boats which had stood the test. Under these circumstances he asked the British Admiralty if they would recommend the purchase of the submarines.
My hon. friend says that I am very much to blame for making it known that these submarines had not stood the test required by the Chilian government. He says that my statement will give great comfort to Germans in the United States and that it will cause alarm on the Pacific coast; that cannot be so, because I merely stated what was published by a newspaper of very large circulation, 8 .
printed in Seattle on July 26 last and what was telegraphed by theAssoeiated Press all over the United States. If Ger-man-Americans are interested in the fact that these submarines failed to pass the test of the naval expert of the Chilian government, let my hon. friend not imagine for a single moment that that fact is not well known all over the United States. No words of mine in this Parliament could spread more broadly the news of that inspection which took place, as I said, at Seattle on the 26th of July. But if there were anything at all to be said about the subject of my bringing the matter before the House it would rather seem that if this statement is incorrect, if this test did not take place, if the naval representatives of the Chilian government did not reject these submarines, then let the truth be known and it will reassure the people of British Columbia, and let me say to my hon. friend that it is due to himself and due to this House that we should make inquiry of his friends in,British Columbia as to whether this test did take place on the 26th of July and whether Captain Plaza, Chairman of the Naval Commission of the Chilian government, had reported recommending that they be not taken over as not being up to the specifications. Further than that it is due to my hon. friend that he should have himself put right because he assured His Royal Highness that it was for financial reasons apparently that the Chilian government did not take these submarines, and he withheld from the British Admiralty the fact that these submarines had been rejected by the naval experts of the Chilian government as early as the 26th of July. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries states that this money was paid to Captain Pilcher. True, it was, but he paid it over to Mr. Patterson, who on the 27th of July had the interview with Sir Richard McBride in Victoria and Mr. Patterson, my information is, as is well known in Victoria, divided the cheque and gave two, one for $900,000 for the amount of the contract price, and I have no knowledge of what he did with the other $250,000.


John Douglas Hazen: The contract price did not include the sending out and the assembling on the Pacific coast, did it?


William Pugsley: Yes, according to my information that was all to be done by the Electric Company, the Seattle



Construction and Dry Dock Company assembling for the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey. It may be -that this 5250.000 was properly expended. I am only stating the facts. But the remarkable thing about it, from the standpoint of my hon. friend, is that he thinks the statement of facts which I have made and which has not been controverted necessarily leads to an inference of suspicion against certain gentlemen in British Columbia. I cannot help that; I have simply stated the facts, and it is because my hon. friend and my hon. friend from Victoria feel that these facts lead any sensible and reasonable man, accustomed to weighing evidence and drawing inferences to believe that there has been something wrong,' that both of these gentlemen have become so angry and have rushed to the defence of Sir Richard McBride as if I had made a violent attack on him as being a boodler and one unworthy of the confidence of his province, when I did nothing of the kind.
My hon. friend says that one of the submarines in being taken over to Victoria unfortunately struck the bottom. It is very curious that I have a statement made by a gentleman, an expert submarine operator, who states that this is not the first time she struck the bottom. You know one of the essential things for a successful submarine is that when she is scaled for sinking to a level of thirty feet she must not go down to sixty feet. They sometimes do. Possibly that is why they were rejected by the naval experts of the Chilian government. This expert submarine operator says:
That the main trouble connected with the submarines was due to the fact that no definite plan was put through to formulate a system regulating- the resistance brought about by the submergence of the vessel. At one time the Chilean crew were scared nearly to death when the mark for sinking was set at thirty feet and the boat sank sixty feet or more. On another occasion, due to lack of standard, the submarine came up under a big raft of logs, breaking the raft and causing considerable trouble, the periscope being damaged.
And the same gentleman puts the value of these submarines at $250,000 each, $100,000 less than Captain Logan's estimate.


John Douglas Hazen: Who is the gentleman?


William Pugsley: Mr. John Martinson.


John Douglas Hazen: Where does he live?


William Pugsley: Out on the Pacific.


John Douglas Hazen: What place?


William Pugsley: I presume at Victoria.


John Douglas Hazen: Is there no date on the
letter?


William Pugsley: It is in a statement
which I have from him. When the papers come down, if the Government see fit to have it investigated, I have no doubt that Mr. Martinson can be brought here to give his expert knowledge before the committee.
Then there is a marine engineer who states that the engines in the two boats are all right and that the whole trouble is with the hull which being overweighted detracts from the buoyancy of the ship. He says:
The only way we could overcome this was by having about one-half the specified amount of liquid in the tanks; then the ship behaved very well but of course was not up to the specifications.
With regard to the question of the purchase of the submarines, I am not condemning that at all, I am in favour of submarines for the Canadian Government; what 1 say is that we ought not to pay too high a price, we ought not to pay for a second-class submarine, one which is not of modern construction and thoroughly up to date, the same high price which first-class submarines can be obtained for; and we do know that first-class modern submarines can be obtained for about $550,000, which would be less than the amount paid for these. Neither should extravagant commissions be paid.
Now, with regard to the submarines being in the dry dock. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, with that ingenuity for which he is remarkable, states that the only time they were in the dry-dock was when the people out in Victoria became afraid of bombs being dropped on them and, instead of leaving them out in the ocean they were brought in and put in the dry-dock; and in order to thoroughly guard them against the dropping of bombs, lights were lighted all around them.


John Douglas Hazen: It is hardly worth while to correct the hon. gentleman.


William Pugsley: I wonder very much
that these gentlemen who advise the Minister of Marine do not go over to London and advise Premier Asquith with regard to proper protection of the city of London at night from bombs, that instead of keeping it in darkness he should light a circle of lamps around the city-and the better the

lights the greater the safety. That would be a sure preventive against the dropping of bombs.


John Douglas Hazen: Did the hon. gentleman
suppose that the bombs would be dropped from Zeppelins?
'Mr. PUGSLEY:	How would they be
dropped?


John Douglas Hazen: They would be dropped by persons who were there, like the German who went down to the bridge at Vanceboro the other day for the purpose of wrecking it.


William Pugsley: I would think that a very imaginary fear. This is what I want my hon. friend to find out if he will, and he ought to have some report on the subject. My information is that one of these submarines was for a considerable time in dry dock. I do not say she is now. I have no doubt that my hon. friend's statement as to a telegram received yesterday is absolutely correct. But this boat was put in dry dock, not because she struck the bottom, but to make some change in the machinery; and the whole of one side of the ship was stripped for that purpose. That is the information I have, whether it be true or not.
Just a word as to my right hon. friend's regret that I should have brought this matter up. I must take the responsibility for that as a member of this House. If my hon. friend has made it clear to the people of this country that the purchase of these submarines was absolutely above suspicion, that they were first-class submarines, that only a reasonable and fair price was paid for them, that everybody concerned acted honestly, that there were no commissions,- all the better for my hon. friend, all the better for the Government, all the better for the people of this country. But I submit with every confidence, that a strong prima facie case has been made out.
Let me repeat very briefly the salient facts of the case. They are, first, that these vessels were built for the Chilian government under a contract price which I am informed, and which as a member of this House I state that I have from reliable authority, was originally $375,000 each; that	Captain Plaza, the
Chairman of the Naval Commission appointed by the Chilian government, was watching these vessels from day to day and from week to week; that when they were completed a test was made, as it was proper that it should be made; that he found they were not up to specifications and rejected 8*
them, and so reported to his Government; that then the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey had the boats on their hands and no customer for them; that the day after this test was made, the 27th of July, Mr. Patterson started for Victoria, thinking he would have a customer in Sir Richard McBride. He sees Sir Richard McBride, and on the 3rd day of August, the hon. member for Victoria (Mr. Barnard) is present with the Minister of Agriculture, and this expert, Captain Logan, is called in. He states that in his judgment the price will be about $375,000 each.


George Henry Barnard: I have already told the hon. gentleman that he is in error when he describes Captain Logan as an expert.


William Pugsley: Well, then, Captain
Logan was called in. Why was he called in if he could not add to the knowledge-


George Henry Barnard: He was not called in. It was his initiative, the whole thing.


William Pugsley: Well, then, Captain Logan was there. He is one of the agents, possibly one of the middlemen who were arranging for the sale of these boats. He goes to the house of my hon. friend the member for Victoria-


George Henry Barnard: The hon. gentleman should confine himself to the facts. Captain Logan has never been in my house.
Mr. PUGSLEY-Captain Logan goes to the office of my hon. friend.


George Henry Barnard: I can appreciate the
desire of my hon. friend io make a good case in his summing up, but he should confine himself to the facts.


William Pugsley: I recognize that it is a matter of vital importance, whether it was at the office or the home of my hon. friend that Captain Logan appeared. Well, then, Captain Logan goes to the office of my hon. friend.
10 p.m. Mr. BARNARD: Wrong again;
it was at the Department of
Labour.


William Pugsley: I cheerfully accept
correction. At all events these are the facts. On the 3rd of August Patterson, after having seen Sir Richard McBride, goes back to Seattle and these gentlemen meet together. The gentlemen whom my hon. friend names are included among them. Captain Logan is asked his opinion of the price.


George Henry Barnard: He was not asked the
price. He volunteered his opinion.


William Pugsley: Well, then, he volunteered his opinion. I cannot express sufficiently to my hon. friend the gratitude which I feel for the way in which he is assisting me. This gentleman expressed his view as to the price of these submarines; he said they should be bought for $375,000 each. Then they telephoned to Mr. Patterson who had previously seen Sir Richard McBride, and the price is fixed at $1,150,000, so my hon. friend says, and that amount is paid. And I state to this House that my information is that that amount of $1,150,000 was divided into two cheques. One cheque for $900,000 was paid to the contractors, but what became of the other $250,000 cheque 1 do not presume to say. These are the facts. Draw from them, if you like, the inference that there has been some wrong-doing. Get angry over it if you like. But in the interests of our country, in the interest of the people who pay this money and who cannot afford at any time, and more particularly in these times of stress, to pay out one dollar more than what a submarine or a gun or a round of ammunition is worth, I ask that this matter be looked into, and when the time comes that a proper and thorough investigation take place.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Report of the Department of Customs for the year ended March 31, 1914.-Hon. J. D. Reid. i

[Stage Direction]
On the motion of Sir ROBERT BORDEN for the adjournment of the House:
Hon. CHARLES MARCIL:: Mr. Speaker, will you allow me, on this motion, to ask a question of my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Hazen) of some urgency to my constituency? I intended doing so yesterday, but the sudden adjournment of the House prevented me. It is regarding the issuing of licenses for salmon fishing in the tidal waters of Quebec. There is some doubt existing as to whether these licenses are to be issued by the provincial Government or by the Ottawa Government. Notices have appeared in the Canada Gazette and in the Quebec Gazette and I have received a number of letters on the point. I would ask the minister if he would kindly tell us how the matter stands.


John Douglas Hazen: My hon. friend, with
the courtesy which always distinguishes him, intimated to me yesterday that he would ask this question, and I had prepared a little statement so that the facts might be absolutely accurate. In 1898, in a reference known as the Fisheries Reference, to the Privy Council, a decision was given to the effect that whatever property interests in the fisheries were held by the different provinces prior to Confederation remained vested in them subsequent to it, but that the exclusive power to legislate or make regulations govering the conduct of the fisheries is vested in the Federal Government. As soon as that decision was given, or immediately afterwards, all the provinces that are sea-washed and have fisheries claimed the fisheries, not only in the tidal as well as the non-tidal portions of all the rivers, but in the bays and in the three-mile limit as well. The officers of the department in Ottawa, however, contended that, while there was no question about the non-tidal fisheries being owned by the provinces, in tidal waters, no matter where situated, there is a public right of fishery controllable only by the Federal Government and Parliament.
At the time it was hoped that the outstanding question of jurisdiction in tidal waters could be settled amicably, and all the provinces affected, except Quebec, agreed that pending a settlement of such question the Federal Government should continue to administer the fisheries in tidal waters as theretofore. It was finally arranged with Quebec that, pending such settlement, the jurisdiction of the fisheries on the south side of the river and gulf of St. Lawrence, and on the north side west of Point des Monts, would be handed over to the province, while the Federal Government would continue to administer the fisheries east of Point des Monts.
The negotiations with the provinces took much longer than was anticipated, and in 1908 British Columbia decided to act on the assumption that it possessed the property interests in the fisheries in tidal waters, and consequently started to require licenses from fishermen before they would be allowed to operate therein.
There were negotiations and finally a reference of certain questions to the court was agreed to with British Columbia, and these questions were so framed as to decide the matter in all the other sea-washed provinces. While the reference was with British Columbia, the other interested

provinces, including Quebec, became intervenants. The Supreme Court upheld the contention of the Federal Government on every point and on appeal to the Privy Council the decision of the Supreme Court was fully sustained.
The decision of the Privy Council, in brief, is that there is in tidal waters, no matter where situated, a public right of fishery which is controllable only by the Federal Government.
Following this decision, the Department of the Naval Service took steps to assert the rights which they believed the Dominion possessed in so far as the control of fisheries in tidal waters was concerned and in consequence of this judgment of the Supreme Court and Privy Council the province of Quebec was requested to hand over to the Federal Government the administration of the tidal fisheries which had been handed over to it following the 1898 decision and pending a settlement of the question of right. Quebec declined to do so on the ground that as the reference was with British Columbia alone the judgment did not apply to that province, that Magna Charta does not apply in Quebec, and that there is no public right of fishery in the waters of Quebec. There was a good deal of correspondence between the department and the government at Quebec and it was pointed out in reply that while the issue was confined to British Columbia the Privy Council laid down certain principles of public law which apply to New Brunswick, Nova Scotia or Quebec equally as well as to British Columbia. During the course of the correspondence it was intimated in a letter written by the deputy minister to either the Deputy Minister or the Minister of Mines and Colonization in Quebec that if the province desired to enter into negotiations on the question we would be prepared to do so as we were acting under what we believed to be our absolute right under the law and we were willing to concede to Quebec the credit of doing the same thing. As the question must clearly be settled some way or other, we were willing to have a case stated and a further reference made to the courts so that there might be no further question about the matter -and that the question should be settled as it must be settled one way or the other. We said that we were prepared to discuss the matter, but as there was no suggestion of favourable consideration of this course, the Federal Government decided that the only
course open to it was to carry out the law as laid down by the Privy Council. Consequently, the department issued a notice-stating that during the next fishing season licenses would be granted by the Federal; Government to those who were fishing in tidal waters and intimated that any one fishing without such a license would be prosecuted and prevented from doing so. The Government of Quebec has issued a similar nowe to the effect, I understand, that any one fishing in these waters must first obtain a license from the Province of Quebec. Our department, acting on what we believe to be the decision of the Privy Council-


Wilfrid Laurier: In the 1898 or the subsequent case?


John Douglas Hazen: The British Columbia caseacting on what we believe to be the decision of the Privy Council, which decision is applicable quite as much to Quebec as to British Columbia, and having also the strong opinion of the Department of Justice to the effect that it is the proper position to take, felt that it was our duty to assert the rights of the Dominion in these tidal waters. I feel, however, that the matter is one in which the province of Quebec honestly maintains the position that it upholds at the present time and that the question will therefore have to be settled in the courts. If there is no agreement in the meantime, next year somebody will be fishing without a license from the Dominion Government, our officers will probably arrest him and have him fined and no doubt an appeal will go to the courts, or it may be taken up in another way through action by the Province of Quebec. It is not desirable that this matter should be left in a state of doubt and uncertainty and it is desirable that a stated case should be placed before the Privy Council as soon as possible. I am pleased to say that since this correspondence took place, within the last day or two, there has been some communication on the subject between the Attorney General of Quebec and the Department of Justice in Ottawa, and there is every reason for thinking that a conference will be held in a short time at which the matter will be discussed between the two Governments and some course taken which is reasonable and proper under the circumstances.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the House adjourned at 10.15 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Friday, February 12, 1915.