1916-02-11

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Rhodes in the Chair.
Ocean and river service-inspection of live stock shipment, $5,000.
["My hon. friend from South Renfrew (Mr. Graham) referred the other day with appreciation to the work that had been performed by the Pubic Works Department in equipping this building so promptly and conveniently for the purposes of Parliament. If I may be permitted, I would like to express my warm appreciation of the indefatigable energy and personal .attention which my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Rogers) himself has given, to these matters. I have personal knowledge that he has been most laiotive and indefatigable, ever since we met here on Friday afternoon last, and certainly the arrangements which have been thus carried out have been much more satisfactory than could have been expected., He desired me to announce to the committee tkat the time-honoured custom of having the lightabovethe Parliament buildings will be carried out in the future. Arrangements therefor have already been made, and he has had placed on my desk a little button, which he has asked me to press, and which will illumine the top of this building for the first time since we have 'been sitting here.\nAt six o'clock the House took recess.\nThe House resumed at eight o'clock."]
Mr. MURPHY:: Where is the inspection made? .


Hon. J. D. HAZEN (Minister of Marine and Fisheries):: It is made now chiefly at Montreal. This item is the same year after year. The inspection is to see that all live stock are properly, placed on board the vessels and have proper quarters.


Charles Murphy: Are the inspectors permanently attached to the department or are they just engaged for each shipment?


John Douglas Hazen: They are permanently attached to the department.


Mr. W. CHISHOLM:: Is there an inspection of stock going to different points?


John Douglas Hazen: This is not an inspection of stock; it is an inspection of the provision made on board the vessels for the stock, to insure that they are properly quartered.
To continue subsidy for wrecking plants- Quebec, Maritime provinces and British Columbia, $45,000..	j


Mr. GRAHAM:: How many wrecking
plants are there in each of the provinces?


John Douglas Hazen: There are altogether three wrecking plants in Canada, one for the St. Lawrence, one for the Maritime Provinces, and one on the Pacific coast.


George Perry Graham: Who has the contract for the St. Lawrence?


John Douglas Hazen: The Quebec Dredging and Wrecking Company. The Dominion Coal Company act in Nova Scotia and their contract extends to the Bay of Fundy. The

British Columbia Salvage Company have the contract for British Columbia-


Mr. MARCIL:: Has there been any
change as regards the agreement with the Quebec Dredging and Wrecking Company?


John Douglas Hazen: No.


William Chisholm: What was paid last year to the Dominion Coal Company?


John Douglas Hazen: $10,000.


George Perry Graham: Will my hon. friend give the amounts paid to each of these companies?


John Douglas Hazen: The St. Lawrence, $25,000; hut in a sense we are in partnership with this company, there being a provision that if their earnings are above a certain amount, a proportion of the subsidy we pay comes back. The company in the Maritime provinces receives $10,000, and the one in British Columbia, $10,000. The amounts are practically the same as they have been for a good many years.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: How much
did you receive last year from the Quebec Dredging and Wrecking Company?


John Douglas Hazen: I do not think we received anything. The year before we received several thousand dollars. The amount depends on the number of wrecks; if there are no wrecks, we get nothing; if there are wrecks and the plant works a good deal, we get something back.


Charles Marcil: Were there many wrecks-last year on the St. Lawrence?


John Douglas Hazen: Not very many.


Charles Marcil: Is the wrecking plant at, Levis or is it lower down from the river?


Mr HAZEN:: The headquarters are at Levis but we allow the vessel to run to a, certain point below and a certain point above Levis. She is equipped with wireless so that she can reach any point within a reasonable time. It was thought advisable, for various reasons, to allow the boat to engage in towing and that sort of work because it gave the vessel something to do, and it was thought desirafble that the men employed on her should be kept occupied. If the boat was left lying at Levis, it was thought that the crew would get out of condition and not be as well able to perform their duties as if they were kept working.


Charles Marcil: Has the department taken into consideration the advisability of having a wrecking plant further down the river?
FEBRUARY II, I OH!


John Douglas Hazen: No, that has not been considered necessary.


Charles Marcil: Wrecks occur there, and if a wrecking plant was placed further down the river, it could get to the scene of an accident sooner.


John Douglas Hazen: This plant can get there in pretty quick time. These vessels aTe all equipped with wireless so that there is very little delay in getting to the scene of a wreck.


William Chisholm: In the Maritime Provinces the Government does not own the plant at all? .


John Douglas Hazen: It does not own the plant at any of these places.


William Chisholm: How is the work performed; is it done by contract?


John Douglas Hazen: By contract with the different companies.


William Chisholm: Are tenders called for or what is the arrangement?


John Douglas Hazen: It is about ten years ago since the contract with the Dominion Coal Company was entered into.


William Chisholm: Can my hon. friend give us the exact terms of the contract?


John Douglas Hazen: We pay them $10,000 a year in consideration of which they maintain a wrecking plant, divided in the summer between Halifax and Sydney, and they furnish or place at the disposal of ship owners requiring their services, the following steamers, when required, the Cabot, Cohan, Cacouna, Cape Breton, Louisburg, and the tugs, D. H. Thomas, C. M. Winch, Spring Hill, and the barge Glenville. The steamers I have mentioned and the tugs D. H. Thomas and C. M. Winch are located at Sydney in the summer and at Louisburg in the winter. The tug Spring Hill is located , at St. John and the barge Glenville at Halifax. The contract expired in 1912 and was renewed for a period of two years. I think it has been continued since that time by agreement


William Chisholm: Is there any restriction by the department upon the rates charged when these boats go to a rescue?


John Douglas Hazen: My recollection is that the charges are subject to the approval of the Governor in Council.


George Perry Graham: Does this wrecking plant have anything to do with such cases as that
which occurred when a Government steamer with a minister aboard collided with some other boat? Was that a wreck or only a collision?


John Douglas Hazen: Only a collision.


George Perry Graham: Has that been cleared up.


John Douglas Hazen: The matter was investigated by the Wreck Commissioner, who made a report, and in consequence of that report the captain of the steamer Hugh Fleming had his certificate suspended and the captain of the other vessel, who also was found to be in fault, had his certificate suspended for a time. My hon. friend from Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil) asked me with regard to the operation of the steamers in the lower St. Lawrence. From time to time, as required, we send steamers during the winter season to Anticosti, Seven islands, and other places. The same practice is followed this year as in other years.


Mr. A. W. CHISHOLM:: Perhaps the
minister can give me now information I asked for last night as to the removal of wreckage from Margaree harbour; the minister stated that this work was done by tender and contract.


John Douglas Hazen: It was represented to the deputy minister that this was an urgent matter, and consequently he instructed Mr. Harvey, the agent of the department at Halifax, to adopt what means he thought best to get the wreck removed. Mr. Harvey entered into a contract for $150. My deputy tells me that the file bearing upon the matter is in the Department of Justice under instructions to collect from the owners of the vessel. Does the hon. 'gentleman (Mr. Chisholm) wish to see the file?


Alexander William Chisholm: I am not particular about the file. The statement of the minister was that this had been done by tender and contract.


John Douglas Hazen: I said it had been done by contract, but I did not say that tenders had been called for.


Alexander William Chisholm: I understood the minister to say that tenders had been called for. As to the urgency of the matter, I may say that the wreck had been there for a year and a half before its removal. I may tell the minister, further, that this work was done in accordance with the usual custom of patronage, so far as I can see. The man in charge of the patronage there was asked to get a friend to do the

work. The friend did the work and got the figure he asked. I am not complaining about his getting the money, for he earned it. But to leave it to be understood that tenders had 'been called for. is not right.


John Douglas Hazen: It is a small matter and did not come to my attention at the time. I can only give the facts as they are given to me by officials of the department.
Mr. MARCH.: I do not ask the Minister of Marine to divulge any state secret, but in view of the threats of renewed German activity at sea, could he tell us whether any precautions have been taken for the protection of. shipping in the St. Lawrence?


John Douglas Hazen: I would rather give that information privately to my hon. friend.
Ocean and river service-unforeseen expenses, $5,000.


John Douglas Hazen: That is the usual vote ior unforeseen expenses.


George Perry Graham: How much was ispent last year.


John Douglas Hazen: Last year $1,572, and in the present year up to December 31 last, $88.17. It looks as if we should have enough to carry us through this year.


Mr. MICHAUD:: Would this vote be
used to meet cases of urgency like that mentioned by the hon. member for Richmond (Mr. Kyte).


John Douglas Hazen: No, that comes out of the vote for removal of wreck's.


Charles Marcil: In case of a wreck on the Baie des ChaleuriS, which station would 'answer the call-Quebec, Halifax, or St. John?


John Douglas Hazen: A vessel equipped with
wireless could communicate with either Quebec or Halifax. Quebec would send help as the Baie des Chaleurs is within the Quebec district.


Charles Marcil: Before a rescue call could be answered by sending help from Quebec, the vessel might be lost. I would urge upon the minister the importance of utilizing Gaspe as a substation for the wrecking service.


Mr. J. J. HUGHES:: Last evening the question was raised by the hon. the junior member for Halifax (Mr. Maclean) of the shortage of coal in some of the towns and villages along the 'cost, that are not reached by railways. The hon. member thought it was due to the shortage of shipping. It 
may be partly due to that, but I know, as a matter of fact, that great difficulty is experienced by small vessels in getting coal at the mines. They are kept waiting so long for caTgo that they will have to go out of the business of carrying coal altogether unless something is done to improve matters in this respect. I do not know what the Government or the department could do in a matter of that kind, because as the coal mines are owned by private companies, it might be difficult to interfere. At the Magdalen islands-the same conditions prevail in Prince Edward Island-they can get coal only by means of sailing vessels, and these vessels are kept waiting so long at Pictou, Sydney, and other coal ports that they often go without their cargo. It is quite probable that a vessel getting a cargo only after considerable delay will not return for another; it would not be profitable to do so. It would be desirable that the minister take into his immediate consideration whether or not he can do anything to overcome this very serious difficulty.


John Douglas Hazen: I think my hon. friend
has put his finger on what is really the greatest source of trouble. The difficulty is that the coal companies own their own wharves. The coal is brought down on the wharves on spur lines and there loaded into vesels which the companies charter for the purpose of taking the coal up the St. Lawrence and to other points. When the smaller vessels from Prince Edward Island and other points go there, they are often kept waiting for a long period of time until the large vessels are loaded. If the matter were taken up with the Dominion Coal Company and other companies in Nova Scotia, possibly some arrangement could be arrived at that would obviate the difficulty.


Mr. TURRIFF:: I understand that these. companies exist under charter of the Dominion Parliament .


John Douglas Hazen: No; the coal companies in Nova Scotia operate under provincial charters.


John Gillanders Turriff: It seems to me that the Government should have some control over these companies. The Government should insist on their providing wharves for the smaller vessels. At a time when promptness of shipment is very important, it is unfair that vessels should be obliged to

wait a week or two weeks before being loaded.


John Douglas Hazen: As these companies are incorporated by provincial charter, we have absolutely no control over them. It seems to me that if the matter were taken up with the coal companies they would see the desirability of themselves building small wharves for the smaller vessels.


James Joseph Hughes: Would the minister take *some steps in that direction?


John Douglas Hazen: I should be very glad to use my good offices in a friendly way.


James Joseph Hughes: That in itself might result in some relief.


Mr. OLIVER:: This is but one instance of what is occurring all over the world at the present time, certainly all over Canada. The tendency is for the big interests to use their charters and powers to squeeze smaller competitors out of business. While the Government may not be in a position to take direct control of the business of the large companies against whose operations objection is taken, in this as in all other cases it is the business of the Government to act as the champion, or agent, or organizing head of the small interests and enterprises. By legislation, by supervision, by enactment, or by administration, the Government should attempt in some measure to counterbalance the disadvantage under which the, larger interests place their smaller competitors, so as to give the small competitors a chance in their competition for the business of the country. That is what has been done by the Grain Act in the matter of car distribution. The question has actually been taken hold of and dealt with in that Act, and while it may not be possible to apply its terms to all these transactions, yet what has been done in this Tespect has been of great benefit to that particular interest, and should be done as far as it can be done in respect of all other interests where the conditions are approximately the same.


John Douglas Hazen: I rise not to disagree with the remarks of the hon. member for Edmonton, but to point out to the hon. member for Kings, Prince Edward Island, that I think the good offices of the Government of Nova Scotia would prove more effective than my good offices in connection with a matter of this kind, and for this reason: The coal mines are the property of the Government of Nova Scotia, and are under lease to the operating companies., If my
hon. friend would apply to his friends in the Nova Scotia Government, I think they may be able to persuade the owners of the coal mines of the desirability of making provision for the loading of the smaller vessels without undue delay.


William Chisholm: It would seem
that this Government ought to have some jurisdiction over the coal mining operations, which form part of the trade and commerce of our country. The Government has made arrangements whereby shippers by rail are fairly dealt with; surely something can be done in connection with the operations of these coal companies, even though the mines be owned by the province of Nova Scotia. This is a long standing grievance which has been brought to the attention of the Government on many occasions during past years by Mr. A. G. Bailey, with whose correspondence I am quite sure the minister is familiar. If the grievance were confined entirely to the one province, as the minister suggests, Mr. Bailey would not have brought the matter to the attention of this Parliament as he has done. It is a matter of transportation that affects the trade and commerce of the country and therefore this Government should deal with it in some way. ,
Public Works-capital (Marine Department), ship channel, river St. Lawrence, $1,172,000.


John Douglas Hazen: This large item is in connection with the work that is'being carried on in the St. Lawrence ship channel. It is to make provision for the maintenance and operation of the ship channel dredging fleet, as well as general additions to the machinery and plant, all according to the detailed Estimates which I have here and which I shall read if hon. gentlemen are interested in them. The increase of $135,000 is in consequence of the large additions made to the fleet from year to year. There are elevator dredges with tugs at an estimated cost of operation of $45,000; two selfpropelling steel elevator dredges at an estimated cost of $100,000; hydraulic dredges, at an estimated cost of $118,000, and so on.


Charles Marcil: Would the minister give
us some information of the operation at Sorel during the past year?


John Douglas Hazen: I will read the memorandum giving the details of the work. It is as follows:
During the season of 1915, 15 dredges and attending plant were kept at work day and night, deepening and improving the ship channel,

from Montreal to the foot of the Island of Orleans, removing a total amount of 8,462,957 cubic yards of material, varying from soft clay to hard shale rock.	.
Considerable work was done widening the channel through Montreal harbour, in St. Mary's current and Longueuil shoal, where it it proposed to widen the channel from 700 to 800 feet.
Good progress in deepening of the channel to 35 feet at extreme low water was made, between Three Rivers and Montreal, eight miles in length having been accomplished during the last season.
There remains very little of the. channel through lake St. Peter that is not deepened to 35 feet.
The Cap Charles channel, Cap-ft-la-Roche district, was completed to 30 feet at extreme low water, and widened from 300 feet to 450 feet and 650 feet at the Curve.
A new range of lights was constructed to mark the new centre line. The channel was buoyed to give the increased width and opened to navigation.
The Grondines channel was also completed to 30 feet in depth and 450 feet in width. A new range of lights was constructed to mark the new centre line. This channel was also buoyed out to give the increased width.
The widening of Cap-ft-la-Roche curve is almost completed, but there remains considerable deepening and cleaning up to be done yet. There is a large area of rock which has been broken by the rock cutter, in readiness for next season's work.
The new channel for light draught vessels and tows, through the islands opposite Sorel, to lake St. Peter to a depth of 15 feet at low water and a minimum width of 400 feet was completed and will be opened for navigation next spring. New lighthouses have been constructed to mark the different courses. This will oblige all tows, etc., to keep out of the ship channel. There is now a distance of over 50 miles, between lake St. Peter and Montreal, where the tows and light draught vessels can keep out of the ship channel. This will avoid the delays and annoyance caused to ocean steamers by these vessels.
The dredging operations in the north channel below Quebec have been carried on vigorously, and good progress has been made, two dredges being kept at work during the whole season. They removed 2,197,568 cubic yards, there still remains 6,928,805 cubic yards to be dredged. This channel is to be 1,000 feet in width anu io being deepened to 35 feet at extreme low tide. Where there was only 7 feet at low tide, there is now a depth of about 26 feet.
With the new dredge now building at Canadian Vickers, Limited, Montreal, greater progress will be made. The completion of this dredge has been unavoidably delayed owing to conditions arising out of the war.
A commencement has been made on the construction of the compensation darts, as recommended by the commission appointed to Investigate upon the water levels of the river St. Lawrence at and below Montreal.
In order to lessen the cost, it was decided to utilize the dredging material taken from the ship channel and deposit it on the site of the proposed dam.
A considerable amount was dumped on the following sites:
Repentigny (between He ft Bague and lie Bellegarde), chenal Corbeaux (between lie de

Grace and Stone island), chenal des Barques (between lie aux Barques and He du Moine), Pointe du Lac, at foot of lake St. Peter.
It is proposed to continue depositing at these points next spring while the water is high, in order to be able to utilize as much of the dredged material as possible.
Referring to the construction of compensation dams mentioned above as being recommended by the commission, hon. gentlemen will remember that a few years ago a Commission was appointed to investigate the question of water levels, representations having been made that on account of the deepening of the channel, and for other reasons, the level of the river was being very much lowered. In consequence of those representations a commission was appointed to investigate the question of the levels from Montreal down to the sea. The commission consisted of Professor Haskell, Dean of the engineering school at Cornell, who had had an extensive experience in dealing with similar matters on the Mississippi river; Mr. V. W. Forneret, engineer in charge of the ship channel work, and Mr. Stewart, chief of the Canadian hydrographic survey. Their report was laid on the table of the House last year with plans. It showed that there had been a considerable fall in Montreal harbour which was due to the removal of the obstruction at St. Mary's current and below and that there had been also a fall in the water below, but not of great extent. These gentlemen reported that that could be avoided by erecting compensation works to hold back the water at various points below lake St. Peter and that this would be comparatively inexpensive because the work could be done largely by taking the material dredged out of the river and placing it so as to make dams between certain islands- Thus with a comparatively small expenditure the levels would be brought back to what they_ were before, and of course these dams would be permanent. That work was commenced this year. The total estimated cost, which will extend over a number of years, will be about $400,000. At Sorel the Government work goes on pretty much as usual. The dredges and the scows and the tugs are at work, and there is some new construction work being performed there. They are building tugs, and scows, and other boats that may be necessary for the deepening of the channel. The number of men employed is practically the same from year to year.


John Gillanders Turriff: Who is the superintendent of dredging on the Lower St. Lawrence ?[DOT]


John Douglas Hazen: The gentleman in charge
of the dredging and other work on the ship channel is W. B. Forneret, who occupied the position when I became minister, and he is considered a competent man.


John Gillanders Turriff: What position does Mr. Kastella occupy?


John Douglas Hazen: He is not in my departr
ment?


Charles Marcil: What was the depth of
the channel of the river St. Lawrence in 1915? Was it more than in 1914?


John Douglas Hazen: Last year, which was an
unusually dry season, I think the level was a little lower than usual.


George Perry Graham: I may recall that a few years ago we had a discussion as to the effect of certain works on the St. Lawrence west of Montreal, on the level of the river east of Montreal. There was a commission appointed at that time to investigate the water levels as they were affected by these works west of Montreal; did that commission report?


John Douglas Hazen: That matter is under the
control of the Public Works Department, and probably the Minister of Public Works will give my hon. friend the information.


George Perry Graham: I wanted to have the
attention of the Minister of Public Works called to the matter. From time to time, certain works are being enlarged on the river west of Montreal, and in the vicinity of the various rapids. In fact, the largest power development on the continent is possibly in that vicinity. It is natural to suppose that from time to time further application will be made for extended rights, and for the development of greater power. Reports have been made by very competent engineers as to other powers on the St. Lawrence west of Montreal, not including the Longue Sault. I would like to have the Minister of Public Works tell us later whether any new power is to. be developed on the St. Lawrence, and what the report of the commission appointed a few years ago was as to the probable effect on the water levels east of Montreal of the further development of power.


John Douglas Hazen: I shall be glad to call the attention of the Minister of Public Works to the matter.


Charles Marcil: Has any part of the Sorel works been used for the manufacture of munitions?


John Douglas Hazen: No.


Charles Marcil: Was that matter considered in any way?


John Douglas Hazen: Months ago my department communicated with the Shell Commission informing them that we would be very glad indeed to put the works at Sore] in the way of manufacturing munitions or of assisting in that work, but the Shell Commission did not think it was necessary or desirable that they should be so used.


George Perry Graham: Has the minister an
estimate of the probable cost of dredging that north channel?


John Douglas Hazen: We are working with the
intention of getting the channel to a depth of 35 feet. It will take at least five years to complete that channel.


George Perry Graham: There is no estimate of
what the work will finally cost?


John Douglas Hazen: We are voting this year a little over $2,000,000, and at the same rate, the cost in five years would run between eight and ten millions.


Charles Marcil: What is the depth now?


John Douglas Hazen: Thirty feet over the whole distance at extreme low water.


Charles Marcil: What is the object of
dredging the north channel?


John Douglas Hazen: It is to get rid of the dangers and difficulties of the south channel. It is thought that on the north side the dangers to navigation would be greatly lessened.


Charles Marcil: Is there any intention to abandon the present navigation rpute once the north channel is complete?


John Douglas Hazen: When the north channel is complete, I think all the large ocean going vessels will use it.


Charles Marcil: What does the minister
intend to do at Longueuil. The minister once made an important speech in which he promised that very extensive works would be carried out at Longueuil for the purpose of making the harbour available to ships of the largest kind.


John Douglas Hazen: That comes under the control of the Harbour 'Commissioners of Montreal. Montreal runs for fourteen or sixteen miles along the river and across to the south shore. I believe that the Harbour Commissioners have in contemplation a project for making extensive additions there when circumstances permit. On



account of the war, public works of all' kinds are not proceeding as rapidly as oould be desired, but the Board of Harbour Commissioners are working up to a plan for the development tof the harbour there and I believe that in the future, as it as inconvenient to have the harbour stretching so many miles below the city, it is the purpose to extend the development to the south shore, and to connect the harbour on the south shore with the north shore by means of a bridge at a point adjacent to where the Lachine canal enters the harbour.
To provide for construction and completion of dredging plant for River St. Lawrence from Montreal to Father Point, $452,715.


John Douglas Hazen: The items that are involved are as follows:
Maintenance of ship yards at Sorel .. $64,615
Improvement of ship	yard	 3,100
New construction	 60,000
Completion of new self-propelling steel elevator dredge for work below ^Quebec	 325,000
Total	$452,715
There was an 'amount of $871,000 voted last year.


Charles Murphy: Is that dredge being built at Sorel?


John Douglas Hazen: 
Mr. PUGSLEY:: How many dredges belonging to the Government are there on the St. Lawrence?


John Douglas Hazen: Eight elevator dredges, two self-propelling steel elevator dredges, one hydraulic dredge, two suction hopper dredges and two dipper dredges. We have fifteen dredges in addition to stone lifters, sweeping tugs and vessels of that description.


William Pugsley: These dredges can only be employed, I suppose, for about six months in the year?


John Douglas Hazen: These vessels are under our control on the St. Lawrence ship channel, hut, of course, there are a lot under the control of the Department of Public Works.


William Pugsley: All these dredges represent the investment of a very laTge amount of capital and they are only kept employed for about half the year. I have often thought that, by making proper arrangements, a considerable portion of the plant might be used to advantage in the Maritime Provinces in winter, in the harbours which aTe open .the year round.


John Douglas Hazen: These dredges work in water where there is no very great rise or fall of the tide and, while there might be
4 p.m. places in the Maritime Provinces where some of them could work, .still for many otf the Maritime Province harbours, you have to get a dredge which goes deeper because of .the rise and fall of the tide. I might point out that the work these dredges are doing is very heavy, and they have to be repaired every year. The winter is the time for. making these repairs so that at the earliest possible date in the spring they may be able to go -back to work. However, the hon. gentleman's suggestion is worthy of consideration. I admit there might be something done in that respect.


William Pugsley: Some years ago, when the late Government was in office, one dredge was taken to St. John and was operated in connection with the Government wharf at the head of the harbour.


John Douglas Hazen: Was that one of the
dredges under the Department of Maxine and Fisheries?


William Pugsley: I am not sure, but it was a Government dredge, and it was very well adapted for that purpose.
Mr. . HAZEN: Does the hon. gentleman remember the name of that dredge?


William Pugsley: I do not; it was one of the ladder dredges which can be used at any depth of water. The reason I speak of it is that, I have in my mind the dredging required to be done in St. John in connection with the development of Courtenay bay. That work ought to have been practically completed by this time, but, as my hon. friend knows, progress has been very slow indeed. Upwards of four years have elapsed since the contract was entered into; and very little has been done beyond building the breakwater. No large amount of work has been, done in the way of dredging, and the delay in the dredging, I suppose, has prevented the building of the wharfs and that, or some other reason, has prevented the .building of the dry' dock.

I have spoken only of this great work at one of the ports of the Maritime Provinces; but the same remark would apply to other ports, like Halifax. If some of the large number of dredges which are used in the upper Canadian waters in the summer could be brought down to the Maritime Provinces in winter, much more progress could be made and there would be less expense to the country. I do not find any fault because this has not been done, as the late Government did not do any more along these lines than this Government bias done, but I do not see why some suitable arrangement oanmot be made so that dredging work in the Maritime Provinces can be carried on in winter by a number, if not all of the dredges that are operated on the upper Canadian waters in summer.


John Douglas Hazen: The subject is worthy of consideration.
New ice-breaker for River St. Lawrenec, $510,000.


John Douglas Hazen: This ice-breaker'which is being constructed by Vickers Company, Limited, under contract, should have been completed now, but it has been delayed through reasons arising out of the war. It will be the finest ice-breaker in the world when it is constructed. Hon. gentlemen who live along the St. Lawrence know how important it is to keep the ice broken on that river during the winter months. It not only has the effect of causing the eaTly opening of navigation and of enabling steamers to get to the port of Montreal several weeks in advance of the time when they otherwise would be able to do so, but, in addition, it prevents flooding and consequent great damage to the low lands below Montreal. Every year w'e do as much work as possible with icebreakers. This ice-breaker will be of modern construction and will possibly be the best in the world when it is completed. It would have been completed now but for conditions which arose in consequence of the war. Last year there was in the Estimates a vote of $500,000 for this purpose, and, although I think we shall not be able to spend more than $250,000 during the current year, we are asking for a further vote of $510,000.
Lighthouse and Coast Service-agencies, rents and contingencies, $160,000.


John Douglas Hazen: There is an increase of
$10,000 in this item, due to the annual increases in the salaries of the clerks in the various agencies as authorized by the schedule established in 1911, to promotions
and additions to the staffs of some of the agencies owing to increased work and extended premises, and to postage and some other items which were formerly charged to lighthouse maintenance, but which are now charged to this item. We have agencies as follow:	In Nova Scotia, at
Halifax, with sub-agencies at Pictou and Sydney; in New Brunswick, at St. John; in Prince Edward Island, a sub-agency at Georgetown; in Quebec, at Montreal; in Ontario, headquarters at Ottawa, with agencies at Parry Sound and Fort William, and a sub-agency at Kenora; in British Columbia, at Victoria, which includes also the agency at Prince Rupert. I have before me the items of the expenses of the different agencies if any hon. member wishes me to read them.


Charles Marcil: Is the minister going to do any ice breaking work in the St. Lawrence this year?


John Douglas Hazen: Yes. We will do it with
the Montcalm and the Lady Grey probably quite as well as it has been done during past years. The ice bridge has been kept from forming in places where it usually forms.


Charles Marcil: I understand the department sold one of its ice-breakers?


John Douglas Hazen: Last year we sold the Earl Grey to the Russian Government. They asked us to sell it to them for military purposes in order to keep open the port of Archangel in the White Sea. This year they came again and urged us to sell the Minto, and, as soon as the car ferry .starts between Cape Tormentine and Cape Traverse, the work for which the Minto was intended, as was also the Earl Grey, that is, keeping open the service between Prince Edward Island and the mainland, will be at an end. We sold them the Minto, and provided them with a captain and crew, who took her to Archangel.


Charles Marcil: Then there will be less ice-breaking done this year on the St. Lawrence?


John Douglas Hazen: No, quite as much as last year, because last year the Earl Grey and the Minto were on the Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick route. The same vessels are on the St. Lawrence for icebreaking this year as were there last year.


Charles Marcil: Can the minister this year give some attention to Campbellton and Gaspe?


John Douglas Hazen: I do not think it will be possible to do so with the plant at our disposal.


Charles Marcil: Navigation is held up there sometimes for a long time.


John Douglas Hazen: I know.


George Perry Graham: At Prescott there is, under the management of this department, a depot which, I am told, is run on very strong party lines. Living as I do but a *short distance from that point, I naturally hear the complaints. I believe that a large number of men have been deprived of their employment, undoubtedly on the recommendation of the minister, who comes from that riding. But that is not what I primarily rose to speak of. That depot apparently has been leased to a company.
Mr. HAZ'EN: No.


George Perry Graham: Or a part of it.


John Douglas Hazen: No part at all. I think I know what my hon. friend refers to. There was no lease at all to any company.


George Perry Graham: Have they the depot for nothing?


John Douglas Hazen: They haven't it; nobody
has it. A request w^as made to me to allow some industry at Prescott to load some' cars on the track which runs into the yard at the depot. As it was a temporary matter,
I communicated with the agent Mr. Taylor, asking him if he saw any objection-if it would in any way interfere with our work or its efficiency if this permission were granted- He wired me that it would not interfere in any way, and therefore this temporary permission was granted. There is no lease or anything of that sort. I think it must be that to which my hon. friend refers-or perhaps he is misinformed.


George Perry Graham: Perhaps I may have
been misinformed. That is not what was in my mind. I would be the last person to object to accommodation being given to any one in that way. I understood a portion of the works Mas being used for the manufacture of munitions.


John Douglas Hazen: No. If the hon. gentleman knows Prescott, he knows that on the St. Lawrence above our works there is a foundry belonging to some private individual where munitions may be made, but hone of our property is being used for that purpose.


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend is sure
that no portion of it is being used for that purpose?


John Douglas Hazen: Absolutely.


George Perry Graham: I do not know whether
I am glad or sorry to hear that, because some of it might perhaps have been used to advantage for making munitions. My information was that a company was using a portion of the Government property in connection with its work. I do not know that I would object very much to that if the terms were proper; in fact, I think 1 am a little disappointed that these works, which are larger than will be necessary for some years, have not bqen utilized in the manufacture of munitions. Could my hon. friend tell me how many employees there were in those works in the year 1911 and how many there are now? I think nearly all those who were there in 1911 have gone and new ones have been put in their places, and there is rather a hard feeling amongst many people in the vicinity over the manner in which the employees of the Marine Department 'at Prescott have been used.


John Douglas Hazen: I have not got the information here, but I will get it for my hon. friend if he desires to have it.


Charles Marcil: Will my hon. friend get
for me the same information with regard to Sorel?


John Douglas Hazen: I shall be very glad to
do so.


Charles Marcil: The minister mentioned
a bridge over the St. Lawrence at Montreal. Is that bridge to be built in the far distant future, or now?


John Douglas Hazen: I think the Harbour Commissioners are considering it seriously. They are making general plans looking to the future, and I think the not very distant future having regard to the way the business of the port is. developing.


Charles Marcil: Have any plans been
made?


John Douglas Hazen: I believe the Harbour
Commissioners have under consideration a certain plan.


Charles Marcil: Is there any danger of
obstructing navigation?
Mr'. HAZEN:	If it were an obstruction
it could not be permitted, but I cannot imagine that the Commissioners vested with the control of the harbour will do anything to obstruct navigation.


Charles Marcil: Is it at some point between St. Helen's Island and the outlet of the Lachine canal?


John Douglas Hazen: I believe so.
Salaries and allowances of lightkeepers, $475,000.


John Douglas Hazen: The expenditure under
this head in 1913-14 was $415,000, and in 1914-15 it was $449,999. There is naturally an increase from year to year, for new lights are constantly being established, involving the appointment of lighthouse-keepers and the maintenance of the lights. Last year's expenditure was divided as follows, according to provinces:
Nova Scotia	$118,923	01Prince Edward Island..	..	15,218	43New Brunswick	
48,589	53Quebec	
82,680	43District of Montreal	. .	. .	30,512	04Ontario	
91,358	21British Columbia	
62,717	69Total	$449,999 34
The expenditure for the current year up to 31st December last was $337,971.


William Pugsley: Why is it that in the
Estimates of this department the revote is not shown as in the case of the Estimates of the Public Works? I refer the hon. minister to page 67 of the Estimates. He will see there a column showing the revotes, and so one can calculate what the expenditure has been.


John Douglas Hazen: That has never been the
practice in the Marine and Fisheries Department. All votes lapse and a new vote is asked for. In the case of the Public Works Department there is an estimate for each wharf, bridge or other workl but in the Department of Marine and Fisheries the votes are general, as in this case.


William Pugsley: But the hon. gentleman says that for the current year the expenditure is only $337,000.


John Douglas Hazen: That is the expenditure up to 31st December, and we have four months to go. As a matter of fact, we spend closely up to the appropriation. It is the habit of our department to put the estimate in this way, and different departments have their different ways of doing these things.


William Pugsley: The advantage of the
way followed by the Department of Public Works is that' a member of the committee can see what is the total expenditure of the year. But under this other method we have to ask the minister in every case.


John Douglas Hazen: It is no trouble.


William Pugsley: But it takes time.


Charles Marcil: Are improvements made
in the lighthouse system as time goes on?


John Douglas Hazen: Yes, our lights are kept
thoroughly modern. This House has never questioned the votes necessary for this service, and I think it can be safely claimed that in Canada we have lights equal to any in the world. The hon. member (Mr. Mar-cil) is familiar with the St. Lawrence, and I need not speak of that. But if one making a trip from Port Arthur to Prescott will observe how the lights show on the American side and on the Canadian side, he cannot but come to the conclusion that our lights are better than those of the United States. So far as the buildings are concerned, and the houses for the lighthouse keepers, the Americans have the best of us-theirs are of more expensive construction than ours; but a comparison of the lights is all in our favour. And not only are new lights being added from time to time, but in the style of lights we keep well abreast of modern improvement.


Charles Marcil: Is the advisability of
building of concrete, and so making the towers fire-proof, taken into consideration?
* Mr. HAZEN:	All the large modern
towers are .being put up in concrete.


Charles Marcil: That is particularly important in view of the fact that so many of the lighthouses use coal-oil.


Mr. EDWARDS:: Is electricity used for
lighthouse purposes to any extent?


John Douglas Hazen: Hardly at all. The lights
are generally at points far removed from electric plants, and in these out-of-the-way places it would be expensive to maintain 'an electric-lighting plant exclusively for the lighthouse.


William Cameron Edwards: I have in mind a place where it might possibly be done.


John Douglas Hazen: The chief engineer of my
department, Colonel Anderson, who has been in the department for forty years and has a most intimate knowledge of 'the. lights, has not favoured the use of electric light in lighthouses. He says that some accident might happen to the wiring or in some other way and the light fail in the midst of a storm when it was of the most supreme importance that it should be kept going.


George Perry Graham: That is just the time
it would fail.


John Douglas Hazen: Yes


Charles Marcil: Have lights been installed on the Hudson bay route?


John Douglas Hazen: Yes, we have twelve lights installed.


Charles Marcil: Are more to be installed?


John Douglas Hazen: Not at present.


Charles Marcil: Last year or the year before I insisted on the importance of lifesaving stations on the lower St. Lawrence. Admiral Kingsmill reported against the idea- But I think that in view of what has happened on the ocean lately, the department might well re-consider its decision. The danger of shipwrecks occurring emphasizes the importance of life-saving stations on the lower St. Lawrence.
Mr. HAZEN I confess that the statement made by the hon. gentleman greatly impressed me. I thought it a reasonable one. But the technical officers of my department do not think such a life-saving station necessary.


Charles Marcil: Perhaps not in time of
peace but in time of war.


John Douglas Hazen: There have been no more wrecks in time of war than in time of peace. But I will take the matter up further with the technical officers, and, in view of that, I would ask the hon. gentleman at what points on the coast he thinks it would be desirable to have these stations?


Charles Marcil: I would suggest that one be established on the Gasp6 coast, in the vicinity of Cap Rosier and Fame point. It might he well to have others at the lower end of Anticosti, at the entrance of Belle Isle Straits, and at Father point, where the vessels call for and drop their pilots.


John Douglas Hazen: I do not see the necessity for one at Father point.


Charles Marcil: That is where the Empress of Ireland went down, with the loss of hundreds of lives. -


John Douglas Hazen: On that occasion our men went out from Father point and rescued many. The suggestion of the hon. gentleman is made in good faith and is worthy of every consideration. I assure him that I will take the matter up again.


Charles Marcil: I am glad that the minister makes this promise. The St. Lawrence river has been so well equipped dur-

ing the last few years that it is regrettable that it should be faulty in this one respect.


George Perry Graham: In the matter of the
lighting of the Hudson bay channel, what is the attitude of Mr. Anderson on the whole Hudson bay project?


John Douglas Hazen: Has the hon .gentleman
read Mr. Anderson's report of last year?


George Perry Graham: I read a report, and also, more recently, an interview which has been criticised and commented upon quite freely in the press. The deduction drawn by the press as to what Mr. Anderson's recent remarks meant was that the department is hardly in favour of the Hudson bay scheme, that, according to Mr. Anderson, the season /of navigation would be very short. I do not say that I agree with Mr. Anderson, and it is possible that his remarks have been twisted out of their original meaning. It would be very interesting to the country, however, if the minister who is head- of the department which has charge of the lighting of the channel would give his idea as to the length of the season during which the channel can be used, after it is well lighted and provided with wireless.


John Douglas Hazen: It was as an officer of the Hydrographic Survey that Mr. Anderson visited Hudson Bay in 1914 and made the report to which my hon. friend refers. I think that that report has had attached to it a meaning which it does not bear. From its reading one would think that there was a -much shorter period of navigation in Hudson straits than is actually the case, for this reason: the Hydrographic Survey was carried on at points somewhat away from the -main line of travel through the straits. I did not anticipate that this matter would come up to-day, but when the estimates for the Hydrographic Survey are taken up I -shall be -glad to give my hon. friend further information.


William Chisholm: With reference to the item for salaries and allowances to lightkeepers, I did not observe that the minister explained the increase of $25,000.


John Douglas Hazen: This service increases year by year. New 'lights and lighthouses are constantly being added, and from time to time the lightkeepers get small -additions to their salaries. The amount is provided in order that we shall have a sum sufficiently large to meet -all the requirements of the service.


William Chisholm: I do not purpose bringing up the old, threadbare subject of dismissals, but I have in mind the case of a lightkeeper whose dismissal was sought by certain persons. This gentleman had many friends on the Conservative side, and the minister finally decided that he would not dismiss him. In order to satisfy the applicant for the position, the minister appointed him as assistant, and the two are now doing one man's work. I had thought that the minister's heart was not quite as obdurate as it was some years ago, and that he was finding places for those persons who were looking for positions. If it is the general practioe to appoint two men to do the work of one, I can readily see how an increase of $25,000 could come about. Would the minister tell me who is the lightkeeper at Cape St. George, Anti-gonish, whether there is more than one lightkeeper there; if so, who is the second man; what salaries they receive, and when they were appointed?


George Perry Graham: About a year ago a sad accident occurred in the county of Renfrew between Combermere and Barry's bay, by which several persons lost thear 'lives. Mr. Pringle, who conducted the investigation, made a very strong report as to the unseaworthiness of the vessel, the Mayflower, which would imply faulty inspection.


John Douglas Hazen: Not faulty inspection. I understand that the boat should not have been allowed by the Collector of Customs to leave port.


George Perry Graham: I thought at the time that the boat had been proved to be unseaworthy, even if equipped with all the appliances mentioned.


John Douglas Hazen: She did not have proper
boats and life-saving appliances.


George Perry Graham: She went down through
somebody's fault, with a sad loss of life. I thought that under the circumstances the Government might have seen its way clear as those who were left behind were not in very good circumstances, to give some aid, the wreck having been at least partly due to the neglect of some Government official. Is there any such provision in these estimates?


John Douglas Hazen: My recollection is that the Mayflower was wrecked some three years ago on the Madawaska river; that she left during a heavy storm although her captain had been warned of the danger; and, she
did not have proper life boats or apparatus, there was loss of life. I do not remember that there was a suggestion of any liability, legal or moral, attaching to the Government in connection with it. It would not be a matter particularly for my department. I do not remember giving any answer about it before.


George Perry Graham: I said I thought the Minister of Finance gave an answer.


John Douglas Hazen: I have no recollection of
any suggestion of the kind and have not given it any consideration.


George Perry Graham: I think I made the suggestion myself, and the Minister of Finance 'said the Government would consider it. I do not attempt to make out a case of legal liability on the Government; but I thought that, as some person in the employ of the Government was at fault, the Department of Marine and Fisheries might well recommend a small grant to those who were left behind.


Charles Murphy: My recollection coincides with that of the hon. member for Renfrew. The inquiry established the fact that the boat should not have been given a license as it was in a dilapidated and dangerous condition. The warning referred to by the minister was given to the captain on the night of the storm. The boat practically foundered.


Mr. KYTE:: In what service is the steamer Noreen?


John Douglas Hazen: She was in our employ at one time.


George William Kyte: I see in the Auditor General's Report a payment to A. B. Crosby, of Halifax, for the rent of this boat.


John Douglas Hazen: The former headquarters of the department at Halifax, situated in the dockyard, were required for naval purposes, and we had to move across to the Dartmouth side of the harbour. This boat was employed for a time in ferrying the workmen from Halifax to and from their new place of employment.


George William Kyte: A. B. Crosby was paid $2,950 for the hire of this boat from August 31, 1914, to February 28, 1915. That is a very respectable rent for the use of the Noreen. She was a steamer about fifty years old, originally known as the Lily, and owned by the Imperial Government when they had forces at Halifax. The boat was abandoned by the British Government and was

purchased by A. B. Crosby, former member for Halifax, at a very low figure. I think the sum paid for her use for six months was altogether out of proportion to her value. I am glad that the charter is at an end.


John Douglas Hazen: This included also the pay of the crew, I suppose four men; the coal, and oil, and all expenses of maintenance. The rental would come to about $16 per day. The boat was reported upon by our officials as well suited for the purpose, and the price was reported as being fair and reasonable.


George William Kyte: I venture to say that she did _ not cost Mr. Crosby $2,950 when he purchased her from the British Gpvemment.


John Douglas Hazen: I suppose that the four men would receive $8 per day in wages, or more.


George William Kyte: I would be glad to know that the minister is paying $2 a day for seamen;
I doubt if he is paying more than $30 a month.


John Douglas Hazen: If my hon. friend from Maisonneuve (Mr. Vervil'le) were here he would say that it was a very moderate wage. But put the wages at $6 or $7 a day, and add the cost of coal, and oil, insurance, and repairs, and I think the charter was fair and reasonable. I am not sure tha,t I can give the information asked for by my hon. friend from Antigonish. I have the report of the Marine and Fisheries Department for the year ended 31st October, 1915, and in'the list of lighthouse keepers I find Cape George, A. L. MeEachren, September 16, 1898, $680,


William Chisholm: Who- is his assistant?
Mr. HAZEN; There is no assistant entered here; it may have occurred since, I do not know.
Mr. CHISHOLM; Will the minister give me the information later? What I wiamt to know is how many lightkeepers there are, when they were appointed, and what is the arrangement.


John Douglas Hazen: I shall be gllad to get it for my hon. friend.


George William Kyte: Is it the practice of the department to supply furniture and bedding to lighthouses? I see an item on page 0-70 of the Auditor 'General's Report, from which it would appear that blankets, 56 pairs; mattresses, and pillow slips, costing alto-

gether $407.57, were supplied' by Giordon and Keith, Halifax, to the Department of Marine, under the head of " Maintenance of Lights."


John Douglas Hazen: There are two points in
Nova Scotia where articles of that sort are furnished, Sable IMand and St. Paul's Island. There are no lighthouses which get furniture. While . I cannot speak positively, it may be that the blankets and mattresses to which my hon. friend Tefers were intended either for Sable Island br for St. Paul's Island, or it may be that they *were supplied for some of the marine vessels that attend to the lighthouse work.
Lighthouse and coast service-maintenance and repairs to lighthouses, $750,000.


John Douglas Hazen: This money is. required for the purpose of defraying the cost of the maintenance of all the aids to navigation, including the cost of supplies, food, lighthouse cleaning materials, the cost of delivering supplies, including the freight and cartage, and also the cost of repairs for such aids to navigation, including material and labour. The amount we ask for is the same as was voted last year. Up to the 31st December of this year we have spent $477,363, so that our expenditure for current year will be well within the sum voted at the last session.


Charles Marcil: Has the vote increased
much within the past few years?


John Douglas Hazen: The expenditure has gradually increased, but not to a very great extent. For 1912-13 it was $688,660; for 1913-14, $699,785; and for 1914-15, $712,447; for the present year, judging from the expenditure up to 31st December, unless something unforeseen occurs, it will not be so large, as it was last year.


Charles Marcil: What is done with requests for lighthouses?


John Douglas Hazen: All requests for lighthouses or buoys or aids to navigation are submitted to the Lighthouse Board. The minister has, of course, the power to overrule the decision of the board.


Charles Marcil: Has that been done in
many cases?


John Douglas Hazen: It is very rarely done.
Construction of lighthouses and aids to navigation, including apparatus, submarine signals, and providing suitable boats for carrying on construction work, $750,000.


William Pugsley: This item is very general in its character; it even provides for

the construction of wharves. I do not think it is proper, but I am told that it has been the practice for a good many years to include the building of wharves in this vote. One would scarcely look for a provision of that kind in an item intended to cover the construction of lighthouses and aids to navigation. Will the minister inform the committee how much of the $750,000 voted last year has been expended, and what it is proposed to do with the vote for the coming year?


John Douglas Hazen: For the year 1914-15 there was expended $996,000 in round figures, and up to the 31st December of the current year we had spent $506,681.70.


William Pugsley: How much of that was
expended on wharves?


John Douglas Hazen: This year we propose constructing a new depot at St. John, and we are estimating for that. In New Brunswick we are providing for the completion of a wharf with new buildings, etc., $30,000; for buoys and beacons, $5,000; general improvements, $15,000; unforeseen works and repairs, $30,000. In this item a considerable amount is estimated for unforeseen works. A lighthouse might be burned do'"", or some other kind of accident might nappen.


William Pugsley: I would like to know
the amount of money expended on wharves, with special reference to St. John for the current year.


John Douglas Hazen: For this wharf tenders
were invited, and six were received. The contract was awarded to the lowest tenderer, Frank L. Boon.


William Pugsley: What was the amount
of the tender?	'


John Douglas Hazen: 


Mr. OARVELL:: How much has been expended on the wharf up to date? .


John Douglas Hazen: The other tenderers were:
William Cooke	$193,500
M. Connolly	  202,500
John A. Adams	 235,500
Manning W. Doherty, the Maritime
Dredging and Construction Co., Ltd. 239,475 Daniel C. qiark	 246,820
The lowest tender was accepted, that of Frank L. Boone, of, I think, St. Mary's, at $185,000.


William Pugsley: Then, what was the cost of the land?


John Douglas Hazen: That is outside of the land. The land was -obtained on a valuation made by Mr. Fred. Sayre, Mr. Lockhart,
and I forget who the other one was. I think there were others. It was found impracticable to utilize the existing wharves, or the inner portion of the wharf, and, on the advice of the chief engineer, an arrangement was made with the contractor whereby the wharf was extended into the street 170 feet, for which he was allowed $47,800.	.


William Pugsley: In addition to the
tender?


John Douglas Hazen: In addition to the contract price.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: $185,000 plus $41,800.


John Douglas Hazen: $226,800. The preparation of the foundation at the outer end of the wharf -presented difficulties, but these were overcome, no additional compensation being paid to the contractor. I will give all the details which I have in the memorandum before me.


William Pugsley: Including the original purchase of the land?


John Douglas Hazen: I have not got that here. That was several years ago, and it was discussed in the House at the time.


William Pugsley: No.


John Douglas Hazen: Yes, it was discussed, as well as the way that the amount was arrived at.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: From whom .was the land purchased?


John Douglas Hazen: It belonged to the estate of Enoch Colwell, or some o/ the Colwell family. Towards the completion of the work, some settlement occurred at the end of the wharf, throwing the concrete out of line, but -apparently not endangering the -structure in any way. One thousand dollars was deducted from the contract price to make this good when it was certain that settlement had finally ceased. At one point the depth of water required was not found; $500 had been deducted from the contract price to make this good. A change in the construction of the wharf was carried out, involving the decking of a large portion and the driving of a number of piles to support the decking. A quantity of the fill was removed at the same time, to relieve the pressure from the front of the wharf, at -a -total cost of $11,250. That amount must be added to the figures. - Additional payments amounting to some $6,000 were made to the contractor during


William Pugsley: That is, $60,000 more
than the original price?


John Douglas Hazen: Yes, but that included the inner part which I have explained. That is approximately the average of the three highest tenders received for the outer portion of the wharf alone, when tenders were originally invited. The average of all the tenders for the outer portion of the wharf alone, exclusive of the one accepted, is $225,750. I may say to my hon. friend that the wharf is now in use loaded with buoys, chains, and other departmental material. A shed has been erected upon it, tracks laid, a large derrick installed, and further improvements in the nature of fencing, lighting and grading are under way. The total estimated cost of these works is $15,000. The work will be completed well within the estimate.


Mr. DEVLIN:: What is that wharf built of?


John Douglas Hazen: It is built of concrete.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: What is its size?


John Douglas Hazen: It is quite a large wharf;
I have not the exact dimensions.


William Pugsley: Who was the inspector of the wharf?


John Douglas Hazen: The officers of the department. It was built under the direction of Col. Anderson and Mr. Fraser, the assistant engineer.


William Pugsley: Who was the local inspector?


John Douglas Hazen: J. P. Mosher, and, of course, the engineer of the department at St. John, Mr. Stanley Macdonald. No provision was made in the contract for berths on the 
down-stream side of the wharf, because it was assumed that this material could be taken out by the Dominion Government dredges if found necessary. This work is quite feasible, and arrangements have been made to have the necessary dredging done by the Public Works Department without further cost to the Department of Marine and Fisheries.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Could the minister give the length of the wharf along the river front, and also the depth back to the land?


John Douglas Hazen: I have not that information here, but I shall be pleased to drop my hon. friend a line giving him the exact dimensions.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I am very much obliged to the minister for giving us this information. The port of St. John is more than an ordinary country seaport; it is one of the national ports of Canada. Anything that is done in a port like that should be done along business lines and not as a matter of political convenience, without using a stronger term than that. Now, one would imagine, from the very mild and gentlemanly statement made by the minister this afternoon, that this was an ordinary work, carried on under ordinary conditions, and that the Dominion Government had an asset for the $244,000 already expended and $15,000 which will be expended, making a total of aboutt $260,000, outside of the amount paid for the land. I do not intend at this particular moment to go into any discussion of the land question, but if my hon. friend, when furnishing the remainder of the information, will tell us who the mortgagee-of the land was, as well as the owner of the very small equity, it would be a very interesting piece of information to the House and the country at large.


John Douglas Hazen: I shall be very glad to give my hon. friend a'll possible information.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I had heard about this wonderful piece of engineering, and, during the month of September or October last, I had an hour to spare in St. John and I went to look it over my-5 p.m. self. I am not an engineer, but I have eyes and some reasonable degree of understanding. I wish the minister had a photograph of that wharf in order to lay it on the table of the House.
It would be an inspiring exhibit, and something which I think the hon. gentleman ought to produce and allow the newspapers



[Stage Direction]
to get hold of. This is the most despicable piece of political jobbery I have ever seen in Canada.
John Douglas Hazen: Oh, no.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Well, that may be a pretty strong term. The minister says that it is a concrete wharf. So it is. I could not get down into the bowels of the thing and see how it is built, and I have not a copy of the plan and specification, but I saw it at low tide. It is a concrete-faced wharf. I do not know what the foundation	is like.
Not only are these great slabs of concrete, about five feet wide at the top and probably wider at the bottom, split and cracked, but there are cracks in the concrete from six to eight inches wide extending from the top down as far as you can see, probably 25 or 30 feet. If you look along the face of the wharf, it is up and down like the waves of the sea.


Charles Murphy: Like the grades on the
National Transcontinental railway.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Why, I think there are grades of ten per cent; at any rate, there are grades of five per cent along the top of the concrete slabs, and when you come over the top of the grade the concrete has to break away you could almost drop a boy through some of the cracks in the concrete slab. The place I speak of would be the northwest corner of the wharf, five or six feet back from the corner, where it is broken off entirely, and the whole front slab of concrete which faces the channel has gone out into the channel one or two feet. A line was run from this point fifty or sixty feet to a place where the wharf came back to the straight line, and workmen started to chip the concrete off in order to straighten it if possible; but, after working at that for a while, they quit, and the wharf stands there with its face chipped off and some iron bolts sticking out of it. If you tried to moor a vessel alongside of the wharf, you would rip the side out of the vessel.


William Pugsley: Are the iron bolts to
hold the concrete together?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I do not know. If you go along thirty or forty feet, you come to a place where the wharf comes to the line again, and then you come to another place where it bends out into the channel. I was told that there was not enough water along the face of the wharf to float a vessel drawing fifteen feet.	(


Mr. ROGERS:: Which wharf is that?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Oh, it is not the big one.
I will come to that later on. There is another wharf down there which belongs to the department of my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works, but that is a-million-and-a-half-dollar affair. It is 800 feet long and 300 feet wide and is built of concrete slabs. Part of it is falling into the channel, and my hon. friend is trying to tie it together with hay wire. This is merely a hint to my hon. friend that we shall have a discussion about it later on.
To come back to the wharf of my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, there is no doubt that it is his child: It was conceived by him, built by him, and I presume he will take the responsibility for it. He will have to take the responsibility for it at St. John when the time comes.


John Douglas Hazen: I certainly will, and I am quite prepared to take the credit for it also.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: The foundation of this wharf was evidently never intended for a wharf. I am told that the trouble was caused by the fact that the engineers would not level off the bottom; they did not take out the boulders because it would cost a little money. The bottom was therefore left uneven, and they first put down crib-work which was intended to come up to low water mark, and then they were to put a concrete facing on top of the cribwork. As soon as the weight of the concrete was put upon the cribs, the cribs settled down and conformed to the slope of the bottom of the river, and wherever one of the great boulders stuck up, of course the concrete slab had to break in two, and that is the case all over the wharf and on all sides of it. My hon. friend says that they did not do any dredging on the lower side. If they were to dredge on the lower side of the wharf, the whole thing would tumble into the water.


John Douglas Hazen: We are dredging there now, and we intend to continue doing so.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: If you dredge there without building another wharf in front of this one, what little concrete you have there will tumble into the river. Really, I have not painted the picture half as bad as it really is. My hon. friend says that they changed the specifications. They had to change them. Under the original specifications they were to fill this wharf; but if they had filled it full, there would not have

been anything there to-day, because it would have spewed out into the river on both sides. They did not dare to fill it kp; they filled the centre with piling, covered that with planks, and the planks are as uneven as the waves o'f the sea. I give my hon. friend credit for the engineering ability of his engineers, because^a great deal of skill has been shown in the buildings and the works. This is a wharf belonging to the Marine Department; it is to be the home of the marine service, in that part of the country; it is the place where the boats of the Marine Department are to lie for purposes of outfitting, taking in supplies and having repairs done, and one would naturally expect to find some buildings on the wharf in which the work could be done and the supplies stored. The engineers have at least shown some engineering ability in . the fact that they did not erect the buildings on the wharf, but away back on the dry land. Those buildings will remain all right, because they are back on the land and have a good foundation. The engineers did not dare to build them pn the wharf, because they knew that the whole thing would spew out into the sea. They have now a wharf there costing about $260,000, up to which they can not bring a boat drawing fifteen feet of water, on which they can not erect a building in which to store their supplies, and which is absolutely useless to the people of Canada. Why did they erect a wharf in such a place as that? For the information of gentlemen who do not understand the river St. John at that point, I may say that at about a mile above the location of this wharf are the reversible falls, in a narrow gorge through which the river runs, and where, at certain .seasons, the.tide drops 27 or 28 feet when the water is flowing out to the sea, and at other times the water is flowing up the river. All members from the Maritime Provinces have passed this gorge in travelling over the Canadian Pacific railway, and I presume that many other members have been there. From that point to the harbour is a narrow gorge, through which the water tears its way as it does through very few rivers in Canada; yet those. engineers went up into that narrow gorge and bought a piece of land, for some reason which no one can explain except that some one wanted very much to sell it, and built their wharf there instead of going down to the harbour front where they would have had smooth water.
There are times of the day when I believe [Mr. Carvell.J
it would not be safe to tie a vessel alongside this wharf. The hon. minister spoke, of protecting the nose of the wharf from ice. Think of building a wharf costing a quarter of a million dollars in such.a position that it has to be protected from ice. No man working in the interest of the country would build such a wharf in a place like that when there are dozens of locations, half a mile or more further down, where the wharf could be properly built, and where it could do some good. The tide there runs, I think, from twenty-three to twenty-seven feet. These are the conditions, and they must be faced. Laying aside the question of the location of the wharf-a location which, as I have said, no engineer would choose if he wanted to make this wharf a public utility to Canada-there are special conditions to be considered. In the first place, in making a foundation for a concrete wharf you must allow for the twenty-seven foot rise and fall of the tide. Then, you must have at least ten feet above high water to allow a vessel to lie alongside the wharf. Then, below the lowest level of the water, you must have whatever depth you wish to allow for a vessel to come to the wharf. If you allow for vessels of twenty-foot draught, you must allow altogether fifty-seven feet from the top of the wharf to the river bottom. They did not dredge the foundations of the wharf far enough, and so when they tried to get the twenty feet or whatever it was they wanted, the whole thing spilled out into the river. I hope the minister will explain some of the things I have described. If my description is not in accordance with the facts, I want him to say so. He must have the information on this subject. He must know how much water there is in front of the wharf; how much there is on the upper side and how much on the lower side. He must know the width of the cracks in the concrete slabs. He must know the variation of level of this wharf and how much filling they were afraid to put in the centre and so filled in with piling covered with planks.
Since my visit to that wharf I have received more than a dozen letters on the subject. Unfortunately most of them are anonymous, and so I do not wish to lay them before the House. But if I should read them I think the minister would be somewhat surprised to learn what some of his constituents think of this work. I have here one.


John Douglas Hazen: Is it anonymous?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Yes. The writer says:
I will give you my name when living under a better administration, but circumstances force me to conceal my identity.
I will send this letter to the minister if he likes.


John Douglas Hazen: Never mind. I think
neither of us takes much stock in anonymous letters.	*


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: It comes from some one who dared not reveal his identity. I tell you, Mr. Chairman, this work is a shame and a disgrace to Canada; it is something which the Minister of Marine and Fisheries cannot laugh away, something he cannot get rid of with a jocular remark. It is a matter which the people of St. John expect him to face. It is so disgraceful that it will require something more than a laugh and a joke on his part to set it right.


John Douglas Hazen: My hon. friend from Carle-ton (Mr. Carvell) is never extremely moderate in his language, and in his speech of to-day he has not departed from his usual style. Permit me to say, I had not the slightest thought of dismissing the subject with a laugh or a joke. The marine depot was a necessity at St. John, in consequence of the ballast wharf previously used for the purpose of storing buoys, chains, etc., having been transferred to a company which erected on the site a large sugar refinery. That fact was realized by my hon. friend from the city of St. John (Mr. Pugsley) when he was a member of the Administration. In the Public Works Estimates of 1909-10-I think it was that year-an item appeared of $50,000 as the first instalment toward the construction of a marine depot at St. John. I understand that my hon. friend had in view a site farther up the harbour than this


William Pugsley: Over the Reversible Falls.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Oh, that would be all right; it is beyond the current.


John Douglas Hazen: That would be all right, but there would be difficulty in getting up and down the falls.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Vessels could pass twice a day.


John Douglas Hazen: The necessity for the work was recognized by everybody. The Marine Department must have a place for storage, and it must be a wharf in order that the vessels may go and take the articles required to the points where they are to be placed from time to time. So, we looked
for a site. My hon. friend (Mr. Carve'll) speaks of finding a site further down the harbour, but it is most difficult to secure a site on the harbour of St. John for any purpose.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Would not there be a site along by Hilliard's mill?


John Douglas Hazen: I think that that property was one of those offered to us. But the prices were many times in excess of the site where the wharf has been constructed. After full consideration of the matter, this site was purchased, and it was purchased at a price less than the valuation placed upon it by three gentlemen in St. John, all familiar with real estate conditions. One of those was Mr. Fred Sayre, and another was Mr. Lockhart. I. think there was a third, but I have forgotten who it was. The city of St. John made us a gift of their rights in certain lots. The wharf was designed by the engineers of the Marine and Fisheries Department. The chief engineer is Col. Anderson, a man of the highest professional qualifications and standing who has been in the department for over forty years. The assistant engineer is Mr. Basil Fraser who has been assistant engineer, I think, for about twenty years-my hon. friend from Russell (Mr. Murphy) will know. The designs were prepared in the department under the direct instructions of these gentlemen, who, before preparing them, had visited St. John and inspected the site, and so knew exactly what was wanted to meet the needs of the situation. Their reports are in the department. After the designs were completed, tenders were asked for, and the contract was awarded to the lowest tenderer;.
The whaTf has been constructed under the direction of engineers of the Marine and Fisheries Department, who tell me that they are prepared to justify everything that was done in connection with the work. In a tidal harbour difficulties are always encountered in wharf construction; I think this is the first concrete wharf ever built at the city of St. John. I desire to say that there is nothing in connection with this whole matter that is not open to the fullest inquiry and investigation on the part of members of the House. There was a settlement at the front of the wharf which did cause a certain cracking at the front.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: It is cracked all along the sides as well.


John Douglas Hazen: No, it is not.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I was there and saw it; in the river side you will find cracks in the concrete.


John Douglas Hazen: It is not cracked all along the side; I have been there, too. My hon. friend speaks of this wharf as if it were a tumble-down structure.


William Pugsley: When did the hon. minister see it last?


John Douglas Hazen: About the first of January. If I can rely on my engineers-and I think I can-the wharf is as solid a structure as it can be; the slight settlement that has taken place has in no way impaired its strength. As to my hon. friend's assertion that vessels cannot lie at the front of the wharf without being smashed to pieces, I need only say that the vessels of the Marine Department, the Aberdeen and the Lans-downe, have been docked at the face of the wharf time and again since its construction. The main part of the wharf is all that could be required for the placing upon it of the large buoys which are used' in the Bay of Fundy, and the different things required in connection with the buoy service. When I was there, buoys running up into hundreds of tons in weight were upon that wharf. The storehouses are built further back, in the position recommended by the engineers as the most convenient, having regard to the uses to which the wharf is to be put.


William Pugsley: What is the depth of water at the lower side?


John Douglas Hazen: It is not very great; I cannot give the exact figures. At the front it is deep.


William Pugsley: How far below the surface of the mud at the lower side of the wharf is the bottom dredged?


John Douglas Hazen: I cannot tell that.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend must
realize how important these things are.


John Douglas Hazen: I know that they are important. The engineers of my department say that the wharf was constructed with the view of having it dredged on the lower side. It can be dredged on the lower side to a depth amply sufficient for the boats of the Marine Department. Arrangements have been made with the Public Works Department by which that dredging, if it has not already been done, will be done in the near future. The engineers, who were vested with the control of operations from the time the con-
tract was made, tell me that the wharf is a thoroughly substantial and excellent structure . in every way, that it will admirably serve the purpose for which it was constructed and will last for very many years. Some engineers hold that concrete construction in tidal waters is a mistake. I know an eminent harbour engineer in the province of Quebec who thinks that wharfs in tidal waters should be constructed not of concrete, ' but of timber. However, time will establish whether or not that view is correct. I myself am not an engineer; I rely upon the opinion of those in whom I have confidence; those opinions I have stated to-the Committee. My hon. friend is at liberty to see every file and paper in connection with this transaction from the very first to the very last. My instructions to Colonel Anderson and to Mr. Fraser were to see that the work was carried out thoroughly and well, to give no advantage to anybody for political reasons, and to see that the contract was carried out to the letter and with due regard to the public interest. Had I known that this matter was coming up today in the way that it has, I should have brought with me information as to the depth of dredging, the depth to which the concrete is laid, and so on.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: What is the depth of
water at low tide on the face or river side of the wharf?


John Douglas Hazen: It is deep enough for the Aberdeen and the Lansdowne, which are the two boats used by the Marine Department in the buoy service in the Bay of Fundy. I presume it is at least fifteen feet. I will send my hon. friend the information as to this.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Will the hon. minister send me a copy of the plans and specifications of the foundation part? I am not so particular about the concrete.


John Douglas Hazen: I shall be very glad to
furnish my hon. friend with all plans and everything in connection with the matter from beginning to end; there is not a single thing which I have the slightest objection to my hon. friend seeing. I presume the blue prints of those plans are obtainable;
I will see Colonel Anderson to-morrow. In the event of my not being able to obtain them at once, if my hon. friend will come to the department I will ask Colonel Anderson or Mr. Fraser to show him the plans, to offer any explanations he may desire and to answer any questions he may ask-


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: That is a very fair offer, but I should prefer having the blue prints.


John Douglas Hazen: If I can get them, I will.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: There is plenty of time; any time during the session will do. The wharf will probably stand during the next three or four months.


John Douglas Hazen: Perhaps longer than you
and I will stand.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I should like to have
the information before the session closes. I am not casting any reflection on Colonel Anderson; that is why I want to see the plans. Until I have an opportunity of examining them, I am going to assume that the plans and specifications are all right. I have no doubt that if the wharf had been built according to the plans and specifications, we would not have the condition of affairs that we have to-day. I am objecting not to the plans and specificatioAs, but to the way the work was carried out in St-John. It is a fact that a proper foundation was not made, that the old boulders were not removed from the foundation, and that the filling of the cribwork went down from the very top. You can see great holes inside the concrete slabs where the filling that was put into the cribwork has gone down and out. The holes may be filled up now, but they were there last September. I am glad that my hon. friend takes such an optimistic view of this matter, but I do not agree that a concrete structure which shows cracks from five to seven inches wide, running down perhaps twenty-five or thirty feet, will remain standing for all time.
He has more faith in this crib standing up without any visible means of support than I have or the people of St. John have. Many men to whom I have talked expect to see the thing go to pieces at any time. I make the prophecy that if the Minister of Marine occupies the position he does to-day for two years more, he will either tear the thing down and build it anew or build another wharf around it.


John Douglas Hazen: Will my hon. friend make a little sporting bet on that?	.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Yes, I will make a prophecy anyway.


John Douglas Hazen: I will tell him what I am willing to do with him. If his prophecy proves true, I shall be very glad to give $500 or $1,000, or whatever amount may be agreed upon, to any charity the hon. gentleman may name. If it does not prove
true, I want him to give a similar amount to one I will name. Perhaps this should not go in Hansard.


Charles Murphy: I will hold the stakes.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I. am afraid my hon. friend might be disposed to let the thing stand up a little longer than would be safe in order to get my thousand dollars.


John Douglas Hazen: It will be there when you and I have shuffled off this mortal coil.


George Perry Graham: He is gambling on a sure thing, because he will not be there.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: My hon. friend can not get away from this condition of affairs by any such sporting offer as this. He has to face the situation as it is, and if I have improperly described it, he is at liberty to describe it properly and to set me right where I am wrong. But I have not improperly described it; I have described it as it is. I have not painted the picture as black as it is; and before the session of Parliament is over, we will be able to show other works in St. John of very much greater importance than this that are just as bad as this, and show exactly the same condition of political corruption existing in other portions of the harbour of St. John as I am afraid existed in this portion.


William Pugsley: The Minister of Marine states that my hon. friend from Carleton, N.B. (Mr. Carvell), ie not usually moderate in his expressions of opinion and has not been so in this ease. I have observed thlalt the hon. member for Oaitetom, N.B., does not very often go wrong. He has a faculty for finding out where errors have been committed and where wrong has been done, and perhaps, when he has discovered those errors and those instances of wrong-doing he is pretty forceful in the expression of his opinion. I do not think any one could blame him for that, that is his duty. He is here, a member of Parliament, representing a portion of the people of this country, and I think in this matter, as in other matters which he has felt it his duty do bring to the attention of Parliament and of the country, he has simply been doing what was absolutely correct and should be expected of him as a member of this House. The hon. member has made a very strong; statement, which has not been answered by the minister. He has stated that upon the southern side of this wharf there is scarcely any water, and that if the mud there is dredged out

to a depth sufficient to allow vessels to lie there at low tide, the structure will tumble over to the south and become a wreck.
' Mr. HAZEN: The engineer of the department says very differently.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend the
minister says he went there in January of this year, and yet he cannot tell the depth of the water on the southern side of the wharf which he has constructed in his own constituency, in his home city, and in which he has evidently taken a pride. He cannot say whether the depth of water is one foot or five feet.


John Douglas Hazen: It has always been intended to dredge that out.


William Pugsley: But does not my hon.
friend see, as a gentleman having ordinary judgment, that you cannot dredge out on the southern side of the wharf unless the wharf setting runs down to at least one or two feet lower than you are going to dredge?


John Douglas Hazen: Exactly, and the engineers say that is being done, that it is to be dredged out sufficiently for boats to lie there at low tide.


William Pugsley: The hon. member for
Carleton says that the foundation has evidently not been properly prepared for the wharf. He has also stated that there is a great crack, in fact, not only one crack, but several, extending from the top of the wharf right down to the lowest part, and that it can be seen at low tide.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: And that is on the lower side of the wharf as well as on the face and to some extent on the upper side, but not to the same extent as on the lower side and on the face.


William Pugsley: That is an extremely
serious statement, and yet my hon. friend the minister, who was there only -a few weeks ago, does not deny it.,


John Douglas Hazen: I do deny the statement
that the wharf was all cracked.


William Pugsley: Of course, the hon.
member for Carleton does not mean that there are not some parts of it that have no cracks, because if it was all cracks there would be no wharf: it would be all space and no solidity. When my hon. friend from Carleton states that there are large cracks extending from the top to low water, both in the front and lower side, and on the upper side as well


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: To some extent on the
upper side as well.


William Pugsley: 
Frank Broadstreet Carvell: That is right.


William Pugsley: Mr. Boone is not a wharf builder.


John Douglas Hazen: The Boones are a family oi wharf builders; his father was one before him.


William Pugsley: Mr. Boone of St. Mary's?


John Douglas Hazen: Yes, the Boones and the Haines have been building wharves for years.


William Pugsley: Mr. Boone may have built some small wharves on the river St. John, costing from ?500 to $1,000, but he is not a wharf builder in the sense of being a contractor for large wharves in tidal waters. I venture to say that he never built a concrete wharf in his life. Is the minister able to say that Mr. Boone has 'had experience in concrete work?


John Douglas Hazen: I think he had in connection with piers and bridges; I am so informed.


William Pugsley: At all events, Mr. Boone has not been a wharf builder in the sense of building wharves in tidal waters, and the rumour is that he was not the real contractor, but that the parties really interested in the contract were political friends of the minister, residing in the city of St. John.


John Douglas Hazen: I know that Mr. Boone was there on the work from first to last, from morning till night, while the work was under construction.


William Pugsley: Then can the minister tell us what experience Mr. Mosher had?


John Douglas Hazen: He is a practical man; I know he has had practical experience.


William Pugsley: Where does he reside?


John Douglas Hazen: At St. Martin's.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: What is his business?


John Douglas Hazen: He is a lumberman.


William Pugsley: When I was Minister of Public Works I was always very careful to see that in works of this character we had as local inspector a man of a great deal of experience.


John Douglas Hazen: In addition to Mr. Mosher, the engineer of the department was there every day.


William Pugsley: But Mr. Mosher was supposed to be the inspector.


John Douglas Hazen: Subject to the orders oi the engineer of the department.


William Pugsley: Mr. Mosher has had no experience in concrete work, and yet he is the man upon whom the engineer would depend.


John Douglas Hazen: He is a very practical man.


William Pugsley: He may be a very practical man, but unless he understands work of this character, the work is apt to suffer. Then I would like to know what experience Mr. Macdonald has had of concrete work.


John Douglas Hazen: He is a competent engineer, and I presume he has had experience in building.


William Pugsley: It is important for us to know what experience Mr. Macdonald has had in this class of work, because there is the lamentable fact, if what the hon. member for Carleton states is true- and I have not the slightest doubt that what he states from his own observation is true-a very deplorable piece of work has been perpetrated in connection with this contract. I would suggest to the minister that we had better have the matter cleared up before the item passes, and that he produce all the papers in connection with the work. Then the matter can be threshed out, and if there is no fault to be found I shall be very glad. I am sure that no one will be better pleased to find that there was no fault than my honourable friend from Carleton. It gives me, and I am sure, it gives him, no pleasure to find fault; we would rather be in the position of being able to praise work that has been done. I would like to see the works at St. John of so substantial a character that they would be a credit to the Government and a source of pride to the community. It will not lead to any delay to let this item stand, and to have



the papers and reports in connection with the wharf at St. John brought down.


John Douglas Hazen: I do not think that anything is gained by allowing an item to stand. I want the House to get the fullest information, and I am perfectly prepared, when the motion is made, to bring down all the papers, correspondence, and contracts in connection with this matter. Rather than put my honourable friend to the trouble of moving for a return I am even prepared to give him the information without any formality at all. If there is to be an investigation based on those papers, surely the place to pursue it would be the Public Accounts Committee, where there would be an opportunity of calling witnesses connected with the work. I have no desire to avoid the fullest investigation into this matter, but I would suggest that the item be passed, and I will consider the motion far a return made and bring down the papers. Of course the purpose of the inquiry would be shown in the motion, and perhaps it would be better if such a motion were made. I would be very glad indeed to ask Colonel Anderson and my deputy minister to place everything before my hon. friends if they care to come to the department. I do not like to delay the passage of Estimates if it can be avoided.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I think the minister will see that, while we appreciate his offer, to go to the department would place us at a great disadvantage. I have not sufficient knowledge of enginering to digest plans and specifications and other papers in connection with a work of this kind in an .hour and a half or an hour, which would be as long as an officer in Colonel Anderson's position could afford to spend with us. But if I had those documents I think I would be able to fairly digest them, and I think my hon. friend from St. John would have the same ability. I am not particular as to whether the item passes or not. I think it would be better to let it stand, because after an investigation of these plans and papers I would like to make some other remarks. I look upon it as a matter of such grave importance that we should have a chance of discussing it with a full knowledge of the facts.	.
Item allowed to stand.


Charles Marcil: The minister has given
us the items for New Brunswick, but not for the province of Quebec.


John Douglas Hazen: In Quebec the1 works contemplated are at Amherst Island, one' of the Magdalens, a new lighthouse and fog alarm costing $25,000; at the Upper Traverse, repairs to pier, $8,000; buoys and beacons, $10,000; general improvements, $15,000; unforeseen works and repairs, $25,000; Quebec agency, repairs to wharf, $22,000; in all $100,000.


Charles Marcil: Is $25,000 not a large sum to expend on a lighthouse?
Mr/ HAZEN: It is for a lighthouse and fog alarm. The light is to be a very powerful one, and there is also to be a powerful alarm.
Lighthouse and coast service-signal service,
560,000.


William Pugsley: What is the nature of that service? Is it in connection with wireless telegraphy?


John Douglas Hazen: Signal stations have been established for years for the purpose of maintaining communication between shipping and the shore. These are located at St. John, Halifax, Cape Race, and on the river St. Lawrence, and the Great Lakes as far west as Sault Ste. Marie.


George Perry Graham: How much is expended
on the service?


John Douglas Hazen: The vote is $60,000. In 1914-15, out of our total vote of $60,000, we spent $52,310, and up to the 31st December we spent $42,516.


Charles Marcil: Is there a Marconi station on the Baie des Chaleurs?


John Douglas Hazen: No, I do not think so. There are stations at Fame Point, Quebec, St. John, and Halifax.


Charles Marcil: Has the minister considered the advisability of having a lifesaving station on the Baie des Chaleurs?


John Douglas Hazen: I do not think that the technical officers of the department consider it necessary, because they say that a ship in the Baie des Chaleurs could communicate by wireless with either Quebec or Fame Point.


Charles Marcil: The great bulk of the steamers going up the Baie des Chaleurs are not equipped with wireless.


John Douglas Hazen: All ships under the law, if they are on a voyage that takes them a certain distance from land, have to be equipped with wireless.


Charles Marcil: Whether they carry, passengers or not?'


John Douglas Hazen: Yes; but, of course, vessels on the Baie des Chaleurs are always in sight of land, and they would not come under that provision.


Charles Marcil: Lumber boats are not equipped with wireless.


John Douglas Hazen: No.


Charles Marcil: Yet they go across the ocean.
The committee took recess.


SIGNAL LIGHT ON PARLIAMENT , BUILDING.
Sir ROBERT BORDEN:: My hon. friend from South Renfrew (Mr. Graham) referred the other day with appreciation to the work that had been performed by the Pubic Works Department in equipping this building so promptly and conveniently for the purposes of Parliament. If I may be permitted, I would like to express my warm appreciation of the indefatigable energy and personal .attention which my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Rogers) himself has given, to these matters. I have personal knowledge that he has been most laiotive and indefatigable, ever since we met here on Friday afternoon last, and certainly the arrangements which have been thus carried out have been much more satisfactory than could have been expected., He desired me to announce to the committee tkat the time-honoured custom of having the lightabovethe Parliament buildings will be carried out in the future. Arrangements therefor have already been made, and he has had placed on my desk a little button, which he has asked me to press, and which will illumine the top of this building for the first time since we have 'been sitting here.
At six o'clock the House took recess.
The House resumed at eight o'clock.


PRIVATE BILLS.
[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 22, to incorporate Edmonton and Southwestern Railway Company.-Mr. Douglas.
Bill No. 23, to incorporate the Ontario, Niagara Connecting Bridge Company.-Mr. German.
Bill No. 24, respecting the Toronto, Niagara and Western Railway Company.-Mr. Morphy.
47i	-	*
Bill No. 25, to incorporate the Western Canada Telephone Company.-Mr. Green.
Bill No. 26, respecting the Corporation of the city of Brantford.-Mr. Cocksbutt.

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Rhodes in the Cnair.
Lighthouse and coast service-administration of pilotage and maintenance and repairs, to steamer Eureka, $56,300.
George Perry Graham: What steamer is that?


John Douglas Hazen: The pilot steamer at Father Point on which the pilots go to and come from vessels, and which has been in the service for a number of years. This is the same appropriation as we had last year. In 1914-15, we spent $42,904.64, and the expenditure up to the 31st of December, 1915, was $33,026.10. The expenditure next year . will, we expect, be considerably under the estimate, hut we think it wise to ask for the same amount as we asked for before,, because it may be found necessary to makes some extensive repairs upon the boat.
Lighthouse and coast service-maintenance and repairs to wharves, $10,000.


John Douglas Hazen: We receive this vote every year. As hon. gentlemen know, after wharves are constructed by the Department of Public Works they automatically come under the management of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, and when repairs are necessary, our department puts repairs on the wharves to an amount not exceeding $50 in each case. If larger amounts are required, they have to be put in the Estimates of the Department of Public Works. In 1914-15 we spent $9,993 and, up to the 31st of December, 1915, we spent ..$4,731.13.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: Where are these wharves
situated?


John Douglas Hazen: Everywhere throughout
Canada on the coasts and lakes.


John Howard Sinclair: Do I understand that when repairs amount to more than $50, the work is done by the Department of Public
Works?


John Douglas Hazen: Yes.


Alexander William Chisholm: I call the attention of the minister to a wharf at Margaree-harbour that was constructed some seven or eight years ago at a cost of four or five or six thousand dollars. That whaTf has been in a disabled condition for the last, four years, and can not be used at all. It will take $25 to repair it.


John Douglas Hazen: At present?


William Chisholm: Yes, at present, and for the last three years. It is absolutely useless now, for the simple reason that no attention has been paid to it.


John Douglas Hazen: We will have it repaired right away.


William Chisholm: I made an effort before to get it repaired, but unfortunately 1 am' on this side of the House.


John Douglas Hazen: I shall be very glad to have it repaired. That is a thing to be attended to promptly.


George Perry Graham: Are the large harbours under the department of my hon. friend?


John Douglas Hazen: Some of them.


George Perry Graham: I do not know why it should be so, but it has always been the case that these harbours are under different heads. For instance, the Toronto harbour is under the Harbour Commission at the present time. Does it come under the Department of Marine and Fisheries?


John Douglas Hazen: Yes.


George Perry Graham: And still a good deal of work is being done by the Public Works Department.


John Douglas Hazen: Nearly all of it.


George Perry Graham: I suppose my hon. friend would not be in a position to tell me how the work is going on because he is not doing it.


John Douglas Hazen: No, the Public Works
Department.


George Perry Graham: How much has the
Marine Department spent on the harbour at Toronto?


John Douglas Hazen: I do not think we have
spent a dollar in that harbour on wharves, dredging, or work of that sort. There is a life-saving station in the harbour, which comes under the control of the Department of the Naval Service, but I suppose it is not to things of that kind that the hon. gentleman refers.


George Perry Graham: I took some little part
when the present Harbour Commission for Toronto was established, and I would like to find out how it is progressing. In years gone by, I think, Toronto had the poorest harbour facilities of any of our great cities in the way of loading and unloading, and when the Commission was formed great improvement was expected. But that imfMr. A. W. Chisholm. 1
provement, I think, has not arrived with the rapidity that was looked for. I do not know whether there has been friction be tween the Government appointees and the city appointees, or whether they are getting along harmoniously-


John Douglas Hazen: There are commissions
and commissions. The Montreal Harbour Commissioners, for instance, are all appointed by the Government of Canada. It might be said that they are, in a sense, a branch of the Marine and Fisheries Department. The title of the harbour is vested in these Commissioners. They prepare their plans for improvements, and get the approval of the Governor General in Council on the recommendation of the Marine and Fisheries Department for what they undertake to do. Then, under authority that is given us by Parliament, by Acts passed from time to time, we advance them money for the work. The work is carried on and is inspected by the officer in charge. The Harbour Commissioners pay the interest on the money that we have advanced. So, it may be said that improvements there cost Canada nothing, because interest is paid on all the money advanced. Of course, it cost Canada something in this way,-the interest they pay is three and a half per cent which was about the rate the Dominion paid at the time the Act was passed, but, of course, money costs the country more now. The organization of the Harbour Commission of Toronto is different from that of the Montreal Commission.	Some of
the members are appointed by the Governor in Council, some by the city council and some, I think, by the Board of Trade. They do not borrow money from us, but they administer the harbour, collect the harbour, dues, such as they are, and carry out improvements. They do not act directly under the control of the Marine and Fisheries Department. Then, there are some harbours that are not managed by a commission. For instance, there is the harbour of St. John. The City Council is the conservator of the harbour and appoints a harbour master. The Government has built public works there which have come under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries. The department appoints wharfingers who collect dues, and the money, which amounts to a considerable sum each year, goes into the Consolidated Revenue Fund. The hon. gentleman will thus see that there are dif-

ferent organizations governing different harbours.


George Perry Graham: Will the hon. gentleman give me the names of the Toronto Harbour Commissioners?


John Douglas Hazen: I thought that would be
found in the report of the department, but while I find here the report of the harbour master, I do not see the names of the commissioners.


John Howard Sinclair: Referring to the Auditor General's report of expenditure under the heading " Repairs to Wharves," I find last year a large part of the money was spent in watching sheds. I find the names of sixteen men paid $2 or $2.50 a day, from January to April, for watching sheds. Will the minister please explain?


John Douglas Hazen: It was necessary last year, as a precautionary measure, to put guards on our sheds and wharves.


John Howard Sinclair: Were all these men on the same wharf?


John Douglas Hazen: I should not think so. We have two wharves in the city of St. John used by the large ships in the winter season. The sheds on these wharves have to be guarded both night and day in case of an attempt being made to destroy them. Any successful attempt of that kind would hamper the trade of the country tremendously, and would also interfere with the transport of munitions and other articles going forward for use in the war.


William Chisholm: Have the resident
engineers of the Department of Marine and Fisheries instructions to report the small repairs to wharves that may be needed? If not, in what way does the department receive information on this subject?


John Douglas Hazen: The resident engineers are expected to report to the engineers' branch of the department in Ottawa any need of small repairs that may arise, and they do so, so far as I know.


William Chisholm: To the Engineers'
Branch of the Public Works or of the Marine and Fisheries?


John Douglas Hazen: Small repairs are reported to the Marine and Fisheries. But if the amount involved is over, say, $50, it would be the duty of the resident engineers of the Public Works Department to report to the department to which they belong.


William Chisholm: I have an idea that a great many resident engineers understand it to be their duty to report only to the Public Worktp. Department, '


John Douglas Hazen: They are quite right. 1 think perhaps the hon. gentleman misunderstood me. It is the duty of the resident engineers of the Marine Department to report where small repairs are necessary, but in the case of larger repairs, the engineer, of the Department of Publie Works reports to the department to which he belongs.


William Chisholm: And then is it the duty of the Department of Public Works to communicate with the Department of Marine and Fisheries?


John Douglas Hazen: No.	.


Alexander William Chisholm: I know many cases in which th'e resident engineers have had their attention called to the need of repairs to wharves built for the accommodation of fishermen, and in nearly every case the engineer of the Department of Publie Works was ignorant of the fact that provision had been made whereby money could be obtained from the Department of Marine and Fisheries to make these repairs. Instructions should be sent to resident engineers that this money is available, so that they can act on ^ the principle C(A stitch in time saves nine.


George Perry Graham: I understand that the Montreal Harbour Commissioners were appointed by the Governor in Council on the recommendation of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries.. As the minister has explained, the. Government provides the money and the Harbour Commissioners pay the interest on that money at the rate of 3J per cent, the title of the harbour property being vested in the commissioners.


John Douglas Hazen: That was the case until the last session of Parliament. In order to obviate the difficulty arising from a proposed civic taxation of wharves, which would run into millions of dollars, we passed an Act at the last session, approved by the Montreal city council, declaring that this harbour property was the property of the Crown.


George Perry Graham: I think it was the late Sir William Van Horne, who, discussing the question of transportation, endeavoured to emphasize the importance of keeping the harbour of Montreal in an efficient state in order to cope with, the inward and outward traffic that ought to pass through that

port annually. During the season of navigation Montreal is the centre of a great traffic, both inward and outward. No matter how efficient are the transportation facilities afforded between Eastern and Western Canada, unless the outlet and inlet be properly equipped the handling of the traffic will be greatly handicapped and cannot reach its highest state of efficiency. We have expended many millions of dollars in the construction of canals; at the present time we are really building a.new.Welland canal. Many millions have been expended on harbours west of Montreal, in the Great Lakes and along the river St. Lawrence, and large sums have been expended in the system of canals from Cardinal east. With the three transcontinental railways, the harbours of Quebec and Montreal, as well as those of the Maritime provinces, must be kept in an efficient state, otherwise the expenditure of money for navigation purposes and railway facilities between Eastern and Western Canada will avail nothing. It is the object of Canadians, I believe, not only to carry our own traffic east and west, but so to improve our facilities that we shall be able to carry a portion of the traffic of the great nation to the south. I have never had any fear, no matteT what tariff policy might be adopted, that Canadian transportation facilities -would not be kept busy by the traffic that would come to them. During the past year Montreal has handled a great deal of grain. An enormous crop of grain has been taken from the West, and 1 think it is in contemplation to increase still further the facilities at Montreal harbour. The Harbour Commissioners of Montreal, |an able body of men, as they always have been, find themselves very much crowded at this time by the movement of our western crop. I think the ratepayers of Canada are all interested in the question of how to get the products of the farm carried to the factory with rapidity and at a reasonable rate. These harbours, which afford an inlet and outlet for the great traffic of Canada, must be looked after to the utmost of our financial ability, because by equipping them adequately we provide the means of increasing the value of our products. Can the minister tell us what are the proposed improvements of the facilities in Montreal,
1 what improvements have been made this season, and what is the plain of the Harbour Commissioners for the future? With the further development of the West, and with the continued large production in our
IMr. Graham.]
eastern provinces, the necessity for the development of Montreal harbour becomes more pressing. I have been reading during the past few, days of the increased traffic through Montreal which is destined for ports in the Hnited States. We want to afford such facilities that it will be cheaper and more expeditious not only for ourselves but for at least a portion of the United States as well to send their traffic through our ports, giving our ships, railways and workingmen the advantage of handling that traffic, and at the same time giving our own producers and consumers the benefit that must come from the improvement of our transportation facilities.


John Douglas Hazen: My hon. friend is quite right in the statements that he makes. A few years ago the port of Montreal was a very small port from the standpoint of grain shipments; to-day it is the largest grain port in America. The total quantity of grain received at or transferred in the harbour in 1906 was only 944,321 bushels. In 1908 it was 8,661,000 bushels; in 1911, 21,007,000,; in 1912, 25,000,000; in 1913, 43,349,000; in 1914, 62,318,000. So, from 1912 to 1914 there was the enormous increase of 37,000,000 bushels. The harbour facilities have been pronounced by port authorities who have inspected them to be among the very best on the continent of North America. Only two years ago. the port authorities of New York published a report approving in the highest terms of the work of the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal and the method on which their work was being carried out. As my hon. friend has intimated, the commissioners have done excellent work. The commission that was in charge of the work when I came to office, consisting of Mr. Stephens, Mr. Ballantyne and Mr. Geoffrion, was an excellent commission, and I deeply regretted that these gentlemen, after serving for some time, felt that owing to the pressure of private business it was necessary for them to hand in their resignation. Mr. Ballantyne had told me some time before that -it would be impossible for him to continue, owing to the necessity for his giving attention to large private interests. Being impressed with the value of his work, I urged him to continue it, but after considering the matter he decided that he could not do - so, expressing his deep regret, and bis appreciation, of my urging him to stay. I am glad to say that I was able to make recommendation to council, after consulting the Board of Trade

and business interests in Montreal, for the appointment of three gentlemen who have proved to be worthy successors of the members of the former commission. The work of the present commission, consisting of Mr. W. J. Ross, Mr. Farquhar Robertson, and General Labelle, has been progressive and prudent, and has, I think, met the views of those interested in the trade and traffic of Montreal. They have been adding to their elevator accommodation and are contemplating further additions during the present year. My hon. friend will find in the last report of the Department of Marine and Fisheries an extract from the report of the Montreal Harbour Commissioner regarding the further storage that is required. From that extract and from my personal conversations with the. commissioners, I think I may say that they are improving the elevator accommodation there as rapidly as is feasible, to meet the existing conditions and requirements. They are making also arrangements for further extensive warehouses and sheds made necessary on account of increasing business; and so long as Canada grows, so long as Canadian trade grows, so long will Montreal grow and so long will further facilities have to be prepared, year after year, if that port, the great entrepot of Canada in the summer, is to keep pace with the growing importance and,trade of the country.


Charles Marcil: Has there not been a
considerable falling off in the trade of the harbour of Montreal during 1915?


John Douglas Hazen: The revenues last year
showed a decrease. That was in consequence of war conditions and the difficulty of getting tonnage.


Charles Marcil: Could the minister give
an idea of the quantity of Canadian grain that went by American ports?


John Douglas Hazen: Of course, a very large
quantity goes ,by American ports every year; but, on the other hand, during the year ended 31st March, 1915, a very considerable quantity of American grain went out of Montreal.


Charles Marcil: Is there any hope that
during this season Montreal will be better supplied with tonnage than last year?


John Douglas Hazen: I am in .hopes that as this grain is necessary to feed the people on the other side of the water the British Admiralty will see the necessity of providing plenty of transports for carrying the grain,
as they are now doing for freight from Maritime Province ports.


Charles Marcil: Will the steamers now running to Halifax and St. John run to Montreal in summer?


John Douglas Hazen: I have no doubt they will, as many of the war supplies now passing through Maritime ports will be sent through St. Lawrence ports in summer. I have no doubt the Admiralty will arrange to have similar transports plying to St. Lawrence ports during summer.


Charles Marcil: Could the minister say
anything in regard to the harbour of Quebec, in view of the opening and operation of the Transcontinental railway?


John Douglas Hazen: The report of the Harbour Commissioners of Quebec is to be found in the last report of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, at page 309. The work has proceeded very satisfactorily, and the facilities afforded in the harbour for the accommodation of large vessels are better than ever before. I quote this paragraph from the report of the commissioners, the report [DOT]of their very efficient engineer, Mr. Boswell:
The facilities offered in the harbour of Quebec for the accommodation of large vessels have been demonstrated in a decisive manner when the embarkation of the first Canadian overseas contingent took place in the latter part of September. Thirty-one steamships, [DOT] ranging in tonnage from 4,686 tons to 18,564 tons have been accommodated at the commis1-sioners' deep-water docks and wharves for taking on board the men, horses, ammunition and supplies of the first contingent. Several of these vessels were bunkered here, and sup-* plied with fresh water from the commissioners' water works, which are connected with the city water works.
Work has been done at the Louise embankment, and elevator accommodation at Quebec is completed and ready to handle grain. The new elevator is of the most modern type and thoroughly efficient.


Charles Marcil: Is it being utilized this winter?


John Douglas Hazen: It is in a condition to be utilized. I do not know whether there is any grain there or not, but, of course, it will not be until navigation of the St. Lawrence commences that it will be actively used. I certainly hope that Quebec will become a great grain port, and that grain coming over the National Transcontinental railway will go to Quebec, so that the facilities that have been provided will prove a great blessing to the port and a great business convenience.


Charles Marcil: The very extensive improvements in the harbour are being done by the Public Works Department?


John Douglas Hazen: Improvements in Quebec harbour have been carried out by several departments. The harbour commissioners have done very extensive work there. The extension of the embankment around towards the river St. Charles, which will afford accommodation for some of the largest class of ocean steamships, is being done by them. They have also erected an elevator at that point. Then the Public Works Department have been doing certain very important work, and are now engaged in important work at the St. Charles river, designed to furnish a harbour for the smaller trading vessels.


Mr. COPP:: I understand that the improvements on the public wharfs of the country are under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries up to $50. Take the province of New Brunswick. I think the department has only one resident engineer at St. John. Under these conditions, who reports to the department on the condition of the smaller wharfs throughout the province?
Mr- HAZEN: The wharfinger. He occupies a small position and is paid by a percentage on his collections. He is appointed by an Qrder in Council. The wharfinger is supposed to report either to the agent of the department in the province, or, if he thinks fit, to the department direct. It may be that wharfingers sometimes fail to do so; their remuneration is small, and there may be occasions when they neglect to report. But clearly it is the wharfinger's business. He should report either to the agent of the department at St. John, who would communicate with us, or to the resident engineer at St. John who would report to the department.


Arthur Bliss Copp: The reason I asked the
question is that I had occasion during last summer to go round different places in the province, and I noticed that there were a number of small wharfs which could be repaired at very little cost for the accommodation and convenience of those who use them, but which, if not repaired, would in time involve a considerable expenditure. This is particularly so in the case of the small wharfs on the rivers. When the ice goes out in the spring it is apt to damage these small wharfs, and unless the repairs are attended to at once, a greater expenditure is rendered necessary.
TMr. Hazen.]
I would suggest that there should be some official of the department in each county whose business it would be to report to the department when repairs to these small wharfs are necessary. It would be a great saving to the department, and a great convenience to those who use the wharfs.
Lighthouse and coast service-to provide for breaking ice in Thunder Bay and Lake Superior and other points deemed advisable for the good of navigation, $40,000.


John Douglas Hazen: This item is to provide
for ice-breaking in Thunder bay, lake Superior and other points. Thirty thousand dollars is the amount spent for breaking ice in Thunder bay for the purpose of keeping navigation open to as late a date as possible in order that the grain vessels may get down i to the harbours in the lakes below. The contract of -the Canadian Towing and Wrecking Company amounts to $30,000 for three years. There is a small amount of $500 that is _ paid on a contract with a tug owner, to keep open the navigable channel from different points on the north shore from the date when the regular passenger boats on this route cease running in the autumn'until the ice is sufficiently strong to enable horses to cross in safety. The people living on St. John island have to go to the mainland to their market, which, I think, it at Sault Ste. Marie. The only other item is one of $300 for keeping open the River Ste. Croix between St. Stephen, New Brunswick, vand Calais, Maine. A similar amount of $300 is paid by the Government of the United States. In addition, we watch very carefully every fall as to the necessity of ice-breaking in the Sault river for the purpose of getting the grain down at the very last moment. This year it was not necessary in that case, but every year we find it necessary to watch it.


Mir. PARDEE:: As this item is in connection with the coastal service, I desire to bring to the attention of the minister, and of the other ministers who are present in the House, a report which appears in to-night's Toronto Globe, and in regard to which, I think, it would be only fair to give an assurance to the people living along the border of the province of Ontario. The item in the Globe is headed: " Plotted against Sarnia tunnel - San Francisco indictments against German officials-Scores of charges laid." The despatch is from San Francisco, dated February 11, and it states:

A total of 61 indictments were returned here to-day (by the federal grand jury in the alleged German bomb and shipping plot cases.
It gives the names of the Germans, and mentions that three hundred other individuals and firms were accused. Then it goes on to say that several of these men whose names are mentioned, have been indicted on a general charge of conspiring to set on foot a military expedition against Canada from within the borders of the United States. In view of the reports, published within the last day or two, that Germany proposes, on and after the first of March, to recommence her submarine warfare, I think the matter requires consideration. I am not in any sense desirous of being an alarmist, but it has struck me in this sense,_ and _ I think the Government should consider it, that if Germany's threat is carried out it would have the effect, perhaps, of stirring up German feeling in the States, and it would 'be well for the people of this country to have an assurance from the Government that everything possible is being done for the protection of our frontier I repeat that I do not in the least desire to be an alarmist, nor do I desire to raise questions which ought not to be raised at the present time. Nevertheless, one cannot help feeling, and one cannot shut his eyes to the fact that there is a grave situation as between the United States and Germany, and that in view of the number of German people in the United States and in Canada an exceedingly serious situation might arise. In these circumstances I think it would be well, if it is not asking too much of the Government at the present time, to have some assurance that all steps are being taken to safeguard the frontier.


John Douglas Hazen: I am very glad to be able to give my hon. friend the assurance that every possible precaution is being taken to see that points along the frontier, which might be referred to as strategic points, where there is a danger of damage being done, are protected. There is' a secret service organized for that purpose, and every vigilance is being observed. It cannot be conceived that the United States would allow its frontier to be used as a base for attack upon Canada. Every possible precaution, I can assure my hon. friend, is being taken to prevent anything of the sort.


Charles Marcil: What gives colour to this thing is that one of the persons against whom proceedings are now being taken in San Francisco in connection with plots
against Canada is Francis Bopp, Consular General of Germany at Montreal for many years, who was a familiar figure in days gone by there, who frequently attended the openings of Parliament here, and who was thoroughly acquainted with everything connected with Parliament and the country.


John Howard Sinclair: I noticed in last year's Auditor General's Report that there was a certain sum of money paid to Sir Cecil Spring-Rice for ice patrols and the destruction of derelicts. I assume there is some international -arrangement between Canada and the United States in regard to this work. It would be interesting to the committee to know what arrangement has been made between the two countries, and if it is in existence at the present time, or whether it was simply an arrangement for one year.


John Douglas Hazen: That amount was paid under an agreement come to at the International Convention for the Safety of Ships at Sea. My hon. friend will remember that three years ago a conference was held in London at which all the maritime nations wcto represented and at which the Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries was the representative of the Canadian Government. An agreement was come to in regard to the lifeboats that should be carried, the draught of ships and different precautions for the safety of ships and of persons travelling upon them. Among other questions considered was that of the removal of derelicts. Sometimes a derelict would be found floating around the Atlantic ocean outside of territorial waters and it would not be the special business of any one to remove it. An agreement was come to by which, as regards the North Atlantic ocean, the Government of the United States would undertake the work of removing derelicts.


John Howard Sinclair: What proportion of the cost are we liable for?


John Douglas Hazen: There is a scale agreed upon under which each nation which uses these waters shall contribute its share. The amount we contribute is two per cent of the cost.


John Howard Sinclair: We are not carrying on any observations of our own with regard to icebergs and derelicts?


John Douglas Hazen: No, it was felt by the
members of the convention that the best way would be to place the responsibility upon the shoulders of one of the parties to

the convention, and allow the
9 p.m. others to contribute to the cost. The amount which we pay as our share, two per cent,. I have always thought a very reasonable part of the c-os-t.


Alexander William Chisholm: Who pays the other ninety-eight per cent?


John Douglas Hazen: Great Britain pays twenty per cent of the whole, we pay two per cent, the United States twenty per cent, and France, I think, fifteen per cent. Other nations pay a share.


George Perry Graham: I notice by the press
that the Grand Trunk Pacific intend to operate a line of boats regularly between Prince Rupert and Alaska. I think they say that it is to be a weekly service, but I forget at what perio.ds the service is to be performed; at all events, it is a regular service. Will that necessitate any further expense along the route between these two points on account of the extra traffic for increased lighting?


John Douglas Hazen: I do not think so. That coast is very well lighted. We have put in a very extensive system of lights in recent years. Three years ago I went up as far as Skagway and came down through the Alaskan -territory. Large and expensive steamers have been running on that route for a great many years. I would fancy that a great deal of the route traversed by those boats lies in American waters. It may be necessary that some- further lights are required in Canadian waters but at the present time I do not think that any very great expenditure would he required for that purpose.


Mr. THOMPSON:: Perhaps I can enlighten my hon. friend from South Renfrew (Mr. Graham), as I have to travel over that route while coming to this Parliament and going back home. As he will recall,
' Prince Rupert is just south of the Portland canal, which is the boundary line between Alaska and British, Columbia. Within a few hours from the time the boats leave Prince Rupert they are in American waters, and from there to the port in Alaska, to which they run, Skagway, the coast is lighted, as far as it is lighted, by the American Government. As far as the Canadian section of the route is concerned, I fancy there will be no extra expense.


George Perry Graham: Is it well lighted?


Frederick Pemberton Thompson: I tell the Americans that it is not lighted as well as our section

is. I think the section we are responsible for is lighted very much better; in fact, I always feel safer when I get within range of our own lights, although it is all fairly well lighted.
Lighthouse and coast service-repairs to Maritime road, $1,000.


Charles Marcil: Is that in Gaspe county? Mr. HAZEN: Yes .


Charles Marcil: The usual amount?


John Douglas Hazen: Yes.


Charles Marcil: Could not a larger amount be voted for that road so that it might be made more permanent?


John Douglas Hazen: No, I think we are voting all we can be expected to, It was put there originally as a road for our telegraph line, an aid to navigation. The whole country is now practically settled, and if there is need for $1,000 now, there was a greater necessity for a larger amount years ago. I was down on that coast last year, on my way to Anticosti, and it seemed that, looking . at it from the steamer, although I went ashore at Gaspe, the coast was remarkably well settled. There is no reason for voting any more. I doubt if there is any great necessity for this, but inasmuch as it is a help to the people there,
I do not like to strike it out of the Estimates.


Mr. LEMIEUX:: It is much needed.
What my hon. friend the minister saw while looking from the ship were settlements at the mouths of the various little rivers, but some of the largest sections of the road are probably in the mountains bordering the river St. Lawrence. Originally the amount was voted for the maintenance of the telegraph line, it being a Government line.


John Douglas Hazen: This is where the telegraph line connects with Anticosti, is it not?


Rodolphe Lemieux: Yes. I would advise my hon. friend, when he takes a jaunt down the river, to stop on the coast and see for himself in what state the road is. Several sections of the road have been repaired by the Provincial Government, but really, if a round sum, say something like $10,000, were spent, he could locate part of the road elsewhere, and then have a permanent road and stop paying this $1,000 yearly. I would be pleased to see my hon. friend on that coast, which is a very hospitable one, and perhaps if he saw the road he would change

his mind with regard to the item under [DOT]discussion.


Charles Marcil: 
John Douglas Hazen: This item is'$300 less than it was last year, because one of the pilots has died.


George Perry Graham: Were these pilots retired in the natural way, or were they asked to retire?


John Douglas Hazen: The arrangement is a very old one. The hon. gentlemen will recall that a good many years ago The Canada Shipping Act fixed the number of pilots at Quebec as not exceeding 125. It was felt by all the maritime interests at Quebec that it was not in the interest of the shipping of the port that there should be
t
so many pilots. An arrangement was come to, therefore, I think early in 1903 or 1904, by which these men were to retire at a certain age until the number got down to seventy-five, and on retirement	they
were to receive a pension of $600, of which	$300	was to be	paid
out of the pilot fund and $300 by Parliament. This arrangement, which was made by the Administration of which my hon. friend was a member, was made undoubtedly in the belief that it was in the interest of the shipping of the St. Lawrence ports. We are simply carrying out that arrangement.


John Howard Sinclair: Is it intended that this arrangement shall be extended to other parts of Canada?


John Douglas Hazen: The arrangement was made at the time with regard only to the river St. Lawrence and the Quebec pilots. There are two sets of pilots, one at Quebec and one at, Montreal.


John Howard Sinclair: Why should we pension the Quebec pilots and not the pilots at Halifax, St. John, Canso, and other ports in Canada?
' Mr. HAZEN: The time to have fought out that question was when this arrangement was come to and confirmed by Parliament, which was some years before I became Minister of Marine and Fisheries.


John Howard Sinclair: IS there an Aet of Parliament authorizing the payment of these pensions? Does this mean that the pilots are permanent pensioners on the revenues of Canada for all time to come?


John Douglas Hazen: During their lifetime.


John Howard Sinclair: Is this confined to the river St. Lawrence and only to a certain number of pilots on that river?


John Douglas Hazen: Yes. I will read the information I have on the subject, but substantially my hon. friend has stated the case:
In connection with the Government allowance to supplement pension of certain Quebec pilots, it may be said:
Section 443 of the Canada Shipping Act fixes the number of Quebec pilots at not exceeding 125.
Section 434 declares that the existing rate of pilotage shall not be altered unless the net income of each member of the Quebec Pilots! Corporation acting and practising as a pilot has been less than $600 on an average for three consecutive years immediately preceding, in which case it shall be the duty of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to submit to the Governor in Council for approval a by-law estab-

lishing such increased rates of pilotage as are deemed necessary to secure the pilots an annual income of not less than $600.	,
On the 20th of July, 1905, the Minister of Marine and Fisheries replaced the Harbour Commissioners of Quebec as the pilotage authority for the pilotage district of Quebec (4-5 Edward VII, chapter 34, section 2). At that date there were 118 pilots on the list.
The shipping interests in Quebec among others Wrote the department in 1904 complaining of the excessive number of licensed pilots. They said, " If the present large number of Quebec pilots is retained the pilotage rates will have to be increased so as to give each member of the corporation a stipend of $600 per season as provided by law. This will add considerable additional expense to the St. Lawrence route, which is already too expensive."
It was deemed advisable by the department to forestall any such demand for increased pilotage rates. Steps were therefore taken to reduce the number of pilots to a maximum of 75 and a minimum of 70, which was generally agreed would be sufficient for the service. To bring about this, it was necessary to make some provision for the pension of the pilots to be retired. The pilots' 'fund was only paying some $215 by way of pension at that time. The Pilots' Corporation agreed to bring their contribution up to $300 a year for the pensions of those pilots who would be compulsorily retired under the arrangement to reduce the number of licensed pilots to 70, provided the department contributed a like amount. This would make a payment of $600 a year to those pilots, which was the minimum rate of average earnings under section 434 of the Canada Shipping Act.
In a memorandum made by Commander Spain about the end of March, 1906, it is stated that the 'Government contribution of $300 a year to each Quebec pilot on retirement would continue until the number was reduced to 75.
An Order in Council was passed on the 5th of December, 1906, authorizing the payment by Government of a grant of $300 per annum as pension to all Quebec pilots on reaching the age limit of 65 years, and a similar pension to those under that age if retired on ground of physical incapacity. There is no mention of the fact that this arrangement is to apply only until the number of pilots is reduced to 75.
The contention of the pilots is supported by the correspondence which they have, and by the fact that the agreement come to was that future pilots who were pensioned would receive $300 from, the Government even when the number fell below seventy. The number of pilots now in active service is between seventy and seventy-five.
Mr.. SINCLAIR: Who has control of the appointments of these pilots, so that they may not increase in number indefinitely?


John Douglas Hazen: The pilots licenses are issued to-day by our department. We have an official in charge. This is in compliance with the recommendation made by the Pilotage Commission, and so far as I can find out, the conditions, which for-

merly were not satisfactory, are infinitely more satisfactory now. The number , of pilots will not be allowed to increase unless the shipping of the country increases tremendously, far more than is expected. It is a matter of history in the department, and I am giving the facts as they are given to me. According to that statement of facts, the Government of the day came to the conclusion-I will not say unfairly or unwisely-that the only way to get the number of pilots down was to supplement by $300 a year the pension the pilots received from, the Pension Fund.


John Howard Sinclair: 
John Douglas Hazen: The matter has been taken up and taken up very seriously, and great reforms have been made. We appointed a commission made up of a representative of the Shipping Federation of Canada, and representatives of other shipping interests. The commission went into the matter with the greatest possible care. As a result of its inquiry, the commission made recommendations, and every one of those recommendations has been carried into effect. In consequence of this, I understand, pilotage on the St. Lawrence is in a condition more satisfactory to the shipping interests and to all others affected by this business than it has ever been before. My hon. friend (Mr. Sinclair) raises the question of the necessity of compulsory pilotage. That question has been discussed in practically every part of the world. You can find the greatest divergence among shipping people on this subject. The question is raised why the vessel that does not take a pilot should be required to pay pilotage dues. Well, the argument that has prevailed practically everywhere is this. It is absolutely 'necessary, for the safety of shipping, to have an, efficient corps of pilots. With the great commerce on the river St. Lawrence, and in view of the character of the navigation from the Gulf to Quebec and from Quebec to Montreal, practically through a channel which, though-lighted, requires local knowledge to understand the lights, I do not see how any one can argue that you could get along without an efficient corps of pilots. Very well, how are you going to maintain them? There are some captains who would take the risk and pilot their own vessels. But if you allow' these captains who have local knowledge to pilot themselves and not pay towards the pilotage fund, the earnings oE pilots will be reduced, and so you will not be able to maintain a corps of trained, intelligent, efficient men to act as pilots. As a result,
you will have disasters to the sbijos coming into the port. That is the argument that has, appealed to the shipping people in most places.
My hon. friend condemns the system on the St. Lawrence in another respect. He says that there should not be one pilotage district from Montreal to Quebec and another from Quebec to the sea. I do not think he will get the owners of the large liners that run to Montreal to agree with him, the men to whom-as they have large sums of money invested-it is of the utmost importance to have efficient pilots. The distance from Father Point, where the pilot is usually taken on, to Montreal is 350 miles. A pilot on a boat travelling at a rate of fifteen miles an hour would have to be at his post about twenty-three hours ,in bringing the vessel from Father point to Montreal. No pilot could stand on the bridge of a ship and direct its movements for twenty-three hours; he would probably sleep at his post and endanger the safety of the vessel. My hon. friend will find it to be the general opinion of those who have large sums of money invested in the liners which pass between Quebec and Montreal that it is necessary to have two pilots in order to bring the vessel from Father Point to Montreal. This route will be much easier of navigation when the work which is now being carried on is finished. I do not say that it is very dangerous, but in thick weather great care must be -taken in guiding the ship through the Traverse and the ranges of lights along that route. The pilot who brings a vessel from Father point to Montreal must be constantly on the alert. The route from Quebec to Montreal is practically a lane running in different directions and full of sharp curves; after bringing a vessel from Father point to Quebec, the pilot would not be in physical condition immediately to take that vessel from Quebec to Montreal. Considering the fact that the navigation between Quebec and Montreal is as I have described, one would think that accidents along that route would be numerous; but it is a curious fact that that route has been practically free from accidents while accidents happen when there is plenty of sea room on either side, due, I suppose, to some error in judgment. I can assure the hon. member for Guysborough that when I came to the department this matter was discussed from every standpoint; a commission was appointed representing the different interests concerned, and improved

conditions have resulted, practically no complaint now being made by the shipping interests. No doubt some captains could guide their own vessels with safety, and it may be a little hardship on them to pay pilotage; but that is a condition of affairs that occurs almost everywhere. Besides, the time may come when those men, under circumstances of bad weather, may be glad to get a pilot to bring them safely into port. Under any system, I care not what it may be, there is generally something objectionable to some one. On the whole, however, I think this system is working splendidly. The pilots are under the direction of a superintendent directly responsible to the Department of Marine and ^Fisheries, and the system 'has given more general satisfaction and is attended with less risk and fewer accidents than has been the case for many years past.


John Howard Sinclair: My hon. friend has given every possible argument which could be advanced by the pilots, but he has not dealt with the interests of the shippers. I assure my hon. friend that there. is no such system as this in any. of the great ports of Europe. There is no compulsory pilotage in the port of New York, which is the destination of many more ships than pass up the river St. Lawrence.


John Douglas Hazen: The conditions there are very different.


John Howard Sinclair: Compulsory pilotage is justifiable only when there is a scarcity of pilots; when you cannot find men who will devote themselves to the business of piloting ships, and who will be always on hand when ships arrive. The real origin of compulsory pilotage was the lack of men who were willing to take the responsibility of waiting for the vessels as they came in, the result being that in many cases vessels were unable to obtain pilots when they wanted them. But in the river St. Lawrence, where large numbers of men are competing for the pilotage business, there is not the slightest need for any system of compulsory' pilotage. The system exists only for the purpose of creating revenue for the pilots; if they did not have1 political influence' and the control of three or four hundred votes no such system would exist in Canada to-day. This system has been established and maintained in the river St. Lawrence through the political influence of the pilots; I am not saying that one party is more to blame than the other, but 
we all know that this is a fact. We may assume that every ship travelling on the St. Lawrence and arriving at the port of Montreal is insured.


John Douglas Hazen: The insurance rates would go up very considerably if no pilots were *available there.


John Howard Sinclair: In cases where the insurance companies provide that if the vessel goes ashore or any accident happens, the insurance shall not be paid, the owners will take good care to get a pilot. Under the present system of wireless telegraphy, it is the easiest thing in the world for the captain of a vessel approaching the coast to arrange for his pilot to meet him at a certain point. The agent of the owner at. Montreal or Quebec can get in touch with a responsible pilot and arrange that the-pilot shall meet the vessel at Father Point, or wherever he may be required. That is the way it is done in New York, Liverpool and London; why should it not be done that way on the river St. Lawrence?


John Douglas Hazen: How does the approach by water to the city of New York compare with the approach to the city of Montreal?


John Howard Sinclair: I am aware that there is a difference, but that is no reason why the ship owner should not be allowed to employ his own pilot. He will find his pilot just as he finds every other man whom he wants in his service; it is quite unnecessary for the' public to find a pilot for him or to compel him to take a pilot if ,he does not want one. If he is a competent captain and can take the ship to port himself, he may not need a pilot; if he does need one, he gets the man he wants. That is the business way of doing this thing, and when the Dominion of Canada gets a little older, that is the way it will be done. It would be a credit to the port of Montreal and it would make trade cheaper and more satisfactory in every way if this most intolerable system were discontinued and the people allowed to do their own business and employ their own pilots.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Have the pilots in my hon. friend's constituency made request for a provision similar to that which applies to the Quebec pilots? I fear for my hon. friend, and somewhat for myself as well- that if this discussion comes before the pilots pf the Maritime Provinces, we shall hear something about it in the future.


John Douglas Hazen: We have had this discussion year after year.


Arthur Bliss Copp: When the pilots of the Maritime Provinces read this discussion, * they may desire to obtain the same provision for themselves. I would think that the provisions which apply to the pilots in Quebec should apply also to pilots in other parts of the Dominion. How long have these men to be in the business before they become licensed pilots?


John Douglas Hazen: ' The Quebec pilots are practically born and brought up in the service. They enter as apprentices, serve a certain length of time on river vessels, and a certain length of time on deep sea vessels. They usually start as boys; they can not become pilots after they are 30 years of age.
Mr. H. BOULAY (Rimouski). (Translation.) Mr. Chairman, I should not allow to go unanswered the references to the pilots which have just been made by the hon. member for Guysborough. The hon. gentleman is greatly mistaken when he proclaims in this House and for the information of the country at large, that our pilots are of no use. My whole life was *spent on the shores of the >St. Lawrence. Every year shipwrecks have occurred, and that very often when the ships were under the guidance of very capable pilots, who had made the trip, practically two or three times a month. Nevertheless shipwrecks will happen. And of course, if ships of the large size of those which are at present doing the service between the old country and Canada, were left under the sole guidance of the captain, you may be sure that accidents would be not only as numerous, but would increase three-fold and four-fold.
Possibly the hon. gentleman never ascended the St. Lawrence in a ship, otherwise he would have noticed the numerous breakers which the pilots have to avoid before getting to port.
I hope the views expressed by the hon. gentleman in regard to the usefulness of pilots will not prevail.


George Perry Graham: Could the minister give us any information as to the comparative rates of insurance on the Canadian and American routes?


John Douglas Hazen: That subject is dealt with by the Department of Trade and Commerce. Of course, the comparison is slightly against the St. Lawrence route, as the insurance companies regard it as an extra hazard when a vessel has to enter a river.
Representations are being constantly made by the shipping men to the Government on the subject, and, as a matter of fact, there has been a very great lowering of the St. Lawrence rates owing to the increased safety of that route on account of the improved aids to navigation. But the insurance rates are not yet as low as the New York rates.


Robert Rogers: The difference is about sixpence a quarter.
Telephones in connection with aids to navigation, $5,000.	.


John Douglas Hazen: I would move that that item be reduced to $500. It has been inseited in the Estimates year after year at $5,000, but I do. not know why. For the year 1914-15 we spent under it $8.50, and up to the 31st of December this year $1.50.
Item, as amended, agreed to,
New Vessel to replace the Maisonneuve, $2,500.


John Douglas Hazen: This vessel has been out of commission for the past three years. She was condemned as absolutely unfit for service, and we have sold her at about the price she would bring for junk. We were given this vote last year, but in consequence of conditions connected with the war we have been trying to make expenses as light as possible, and so we chartered the Maggie May, which did the lighthouse work on the Ottawa river during the last year.
Allowance to harbour master at Amherst-burg for supervision of lights and buoys on St. Clair river, the Detroit river, and lake Brie, $400.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: What lights does he take care of?


John Douglas Hazen: We have no agency in that district, and this official brings in the buoys in the fall and puts them out in the spring. The buoys are, of course, very valuable, and must be taken in before the ice comes, and we have found this to be the most economical way of dealing with them.
Repairing C. G. S. Montmagny, $70,000.


John Douglas Hazen: This vessel was sunk in
collision. We advertised for tenders for raising her, and the contract was awarded to the lowest tenderer, the Levis Wrecking Company, at $27,977. The contractors have to raise the boat and deliver it at the wharf at Levis. Then it will cost $70,000 to put the vessel in proper condition for service. The vessel was built in Sorel and cost

$275,000, so that it is well worth while spending this $70,000, as she will then be in as good condition as a new vessel.


John Howard Sinclair: Will the repairs be made in the Government shipyard?


John Douglas Hazen: We have not decided that yet.


John Howard Sinclair: If not, I presume public tenders will be called for.


John Douglas Hazen: Yes, if the work is of such a character that a specification on which to call for tenders can be made by the engineer.	*


Charles Marcil: She was sunk at the Isle d'Orleans?


John Douglas Hazen: Yes.
%


Charles Marcil: Were any lives lost?


John Douglas Hazen: Yes, a number.


Charles Marcil: Were claims made by
the dependents of those lost?


John Douglas Hazen: An inquiry was conducted by Captain Demers, whose report was a severe arraignment of the officers of the boat. One man who lost his life in the wreck was reported to have acted like a hero, and we made provision for his family.
Marine hospitals, including: grants to institutions assisting sailors, $75,000.


Alexander William Chisholm: What does that include?


John Douglas Hazen: This is for the Marine Hospital service. It is difficult to determine from year to year the amount required to cover the expenditure for this service. It is necessary to vote a sum which frequently is in excess of the amount required. In 1914-15 we spent $65,477, and . up to the 31st December, this year, we had spent $48,008. It is expected that the amount asked for will be more than enough to cover the expenditure during the coming year unless something unforeseen happens.
Air. GRAHAM,: How many institutions are there?


John Douglas Hazen: There used to be one in almost every shipping port, but they have been nearly all abolished. A marine hospital is not maintained at any port or in any city where there is a public hospital. There are only four marine hospitals in existence at the present time. The system which prevails is that, in a city where there is a public hospital, we have an arrangement by which the hospital authorities

take care of the sick sailors at so much per day. We pay $1.50 per day at the present time, and it costs the country very much less than under the old system, while the sailors really?, get better attention than formerly.


Alexander William Chisholm: This amount includes, I understand, the amounts paid to doctors who attend sick seamen outside of the hospitals. There are certain ports where there are no hospitals, and it is a unique condition-at least I regard it as such-that a seaman going from- one port to another in the same province does not get the benefit of the sick mariners' fund. If a seaman, for instance, should leave the province of Nova Scotia and go to the Magdalen islands, a distance of 20 or 25 miles, he is entitled to benefit under that fund; but, if he leaves any port of the province and goes to another port in the province, he does not get the benefit. I would like to know from the minister the reason foT that.


John Douglas Hazen: No sick seamen's dues are collected from vessels that go from one port in the province to another port in the same province. . If a vessel goes from one port in a province to another port in another province, the vessel pays the dues. I suppose the reason why the benefit of the fund does not apply to vessels going from one port in a province to another port in the same province is that it was thought they would be near their homes, and that therefore it would be unfair to collect dues from them.


Alexander William Chisholm: The mariners
themselves do not regard it as an advantage not to pay the dues. They regard it as a privilege to pay them. It is an extraordinary condition of things that a seaman leaving, we will say, a port in the province of Nova Scotia and perhaps going 300 or 400 miles away from home, does not get the benefit of the fund, whereas if he just crosses the straits, or to a neighbouring province, he does get the benefit. The seamen are anxious to have the privilege of paying their dues. The fee is a small one, according to tonnage, I think, but it gives the sailors a very great privilege. This is not the first time I have' brought the matter to the attention of the minister; in fact, I brought it to the attention of the late Government, and to the attention of the minister last year. I would like to see some regulation by which if this benefit is to obtain at all, it would be neces-

sary for the mariner to go outside of his province to get it.
Mr. PARI)Eli; Do these grants apply to sailors on inland waters?


John Douglas Hazen: No, the dues are paid only by sailors of salt water ships.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Suppose a doctor should report that a seaman is being attended to, and the ship should go away without his being paid, is the Government responsible for the payment.


John Douglas Hazen: It is up to the Marine Department.


John Howard Sinclair: What is the condition of this fund at the present time?


John Douglas Hazen: The receipts from the fund are larger than the expenditure. In 1914 the receipts were $72,602.43, and the expenditures $65,397.85.


John Howard Sinclair: Can the minister tell us what the total surpluses have been since the introduction of the fund.


John Douglas Hazen: I car.ot tell that, but I have the receipts and expenditures since 1901. In 1904 the receipts were $61,000 and the expenditure $50,000; in 1911 the receipts were $67,000 and the expenditure- $54,779; and in 1913, the receipts were $70,000 and the expenditures $54,000. There must- be a considerable sum to the credit of the fund.


John Howard Sinclair: I would like to inform the minister that his officers are very strict in the administration of this fund. If they were as careful in regard to other matters connected with the Government as they are with regard to this fund, we would not have such big deficits. I am constantly receiving, complaints from sailors who have been treated in the most technical way by officers of the department in connection with the administration of this fund. There ought to be some compassionate allowance, if no other. Let me give the minister one case. A sailor, by the name of Captain Angus Macdonald became ill on the coast of Cape Breton while navigating his ship and he was sent to the hospital in North Sydney. His family who live in my county were very anxious about him, and before he was altogether fit to be removed, he was taken out of the hospital by his family who were anxious to get him home.


John Douglas Hazen: Against the advice of the hospital authorities?


John Howard Sinclair: He became so ill that he was unable to complete the journey home, and he was put in a boarding house.


John Douglas Hazen: I know all about it.


John Howard Sinclair: I want to make my case first.


John Douglas Hazen: It is unnecessary to make your case, because we have paid the amount. It was before me this morning for the first time, and I decided that it was a fair and proper thing that the bills should be paid.


John Howard Sinclair: I am very glad to hear that. But your officers rejected that claim, and this widow had to go without her money for many months, to consult lawyers and get them to write affidavits and make statements in order to have her claim settled. That should not be the case. When legitimate claims of this kind come before you, although you may not be technically liable, they should be paid. This widow should not have been put to all the annoyance and trouble that she was put to.


John Douglas Hazen: If my hon. friend argued the matter much longer I would be almost afraid that I had made a mistake in ordering these bills paid. I am not disposed to find fault with my officials for what they did. The matter was brought to my attention for the first time this morning, and I thought I was leaning to the side of generosity in doing what I did. This man was in hospital, he was being treated there, he left the hospital contrary to the advice of those who were responsible for him, when he was not in a condition of health to go. He went away to another town and took ill there, and a doctor and nurse were called in. Under these circumstances, if they were dealing with it as a matter of absolutely strict justice, I would not be disposed to say that our officials were wrong. It is the business of the officials of the department to deal with things from the correct, legal standpoint, and in the interests of the treasury. The minister feels that he has a good deal more liberty than his officials, and, after weighing the whole case, I thought it was safer to err on the side of generosity rather than be too strict. So this morning, after going over the case with the official who has charge of that work and the deputy minister, I gave directions that these bills should be paid.


Alexander William Chisholm: Is the minister disposed to remove that difficulty that I have referred to?


John Douglas Hazen: Does my hon. friend think that the men who are interested as owners of vessels in his part of Nova Scotia would prefer to have the advantages of this Act on condition that they pay to the fund just as others do if they are travelling from port to port in their own province?


William Chisholm: That is my opinion. I took the trouble to get the opinions of those people that I happened to meet, and I am disposed to think that they are very anxious to have that right. It would save them a good deal of trouble. It is a great encouragement for the men who go aboard a ship to know that they are protected in respect to this matter. I know that^ sailors prefer to go on a vessel that is plying from one province to another rather than a vessel plying between ports of the same province. A man may become ill, and he knows that when he falls into the hands of a medical man he will be well looked after. I would like to see that disability removed for the benefit of mariners.


John Douglas Hazen: That is an old provision of the Act. I have been intending to bring the amendments to the Canada
10 p.m. Shipping Act, which I had prepared a couple of years ago, before Parliament, but last year it was not thought desirable that there should be any more legislation than could possibly be avoided, except legislation in connection with the war, and the position seems to be the same this year. I will give what consideration I can to it, and endeavour to ascertain what the reasons were at the time of the passage of the Bill for the enactment of this provision. If I feel that it imposes any undue hardship upon the shipping interests I shall feel disposed to favour a change.


Mr. GAUVREAU:: A petition was presented to the department by the lighthouse keepers asking for the establishment of a retiring fund. Has the minister any project in his mind looking to the granting of the prayer of this petition? Has he any scheme of his own for the establishment of a retiring fund for lighthouse keepers?


John Douglas Hazen: There was a superannuation existing for civil servants, which Parliament repealed a few years ago. Those who enter the service now, with a few exceptions, such as the judges, have no superan-

nuation secured to them, and it is a little difficult to see why, that being the case, lighthouse keepers should be placed upon a different plane from other employees of the Government, and those engaged in other pursuits, for instance, engineers and conductors upon the railways. It may be that lighthouse keepers can make some arrangement amongst themselves, as the railway men do. I do not see how this Government, in view of the position that Parliament took in repealing the superannuation system, could inaugurate a system for the lighthouse keepers alone.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: Was that the answer given to the lighthouse keepers when their petition was presented? They want to know if you are going to allow them a retiring fund.


John Douglas Hazen: I do not remember what the correspondence was. I will look it up tomorrow. If they want to form a fund the officers of my department will give them all the assistance and advice they can.
Mr. GAtJVEEAU: Will there be any assistance from the Government if they undertake to establish a fund for themselves? Will the Government be prepared to give them a sum of money with which to start their retiring, or pension, fund?


John Douglas Hazen: I am not prepared to say that at present. There are difficulties in the way. You are treating one class differently from another. If we are to have any system of retiring allowances, or Government assistance, it should be made to apply pretty generally to all classes of employees.


Charles Marcil: They have such a system on the Intercolonial railway.


John Douglas Hazen: Do the Government give any assistance?,


Charles Marcil: Yes.


George Perry Graham: The Government give a certain amount, just as the railway companies give a certain amount to their employees.


John Douglas Hazen: Something might be done on that line.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: So that we can understand that there is hope that they will have some relief from the Government?


John Douglas Hazen: We shall be very glad to look into the matter. [DOT]
Progress reported.

On the motion of Mr. Rogers the House adjourned at 10.08 p.m.
Monday, February 14, 1916.