1916-04-13

REPORTS AND PAPERS,

[Stage Direction]
Express -statistics for the Dominion of Canada for the year ended June 30, 1915.- Mr. Reid.
Telephone statistics for the Dominion of Canada for the year ended June 30, 1915.- Mr. Reid.

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

Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	What quantity of timber has been purchased in the United States for the Port Nelson works ?
2.	What was thq total amount paid therefor?
3.	What quantity is now actually in the works?
4.	What quantity of timber has been purchased in Toronto for the Port Nelson works?
5.	What is the total cost landed at that
point?	"
6.	How much of it has been used, or will he used in the work?


Mr. REID:: 1.	4,391,619 ft. b.m. long leaf yellow pine, wharf and heavy crib timber. 168,018 ft. b.m. oak, hard pine, and Oregon pine for clam shell dredge hulls and spuds, nearly all of which was dressed timber.
2.	$109,395.80.
3.	-Long leaf yellow pine: 1,447,619 ft. b.m. in the works. 2,163,000 ft. b.m. in stock at Port Nelson. 761,000 ft. b.m. lost in fire on ss. Alette. 20,000 ft. b.m. lost from deck load in transit. Oak, etc., for clam shell dredge hulls. 168,018 ft. b.m. in works.
4.	Purchased through Toronto representatives of British Columbia lumber compan-

ies: 1,245,160 ft. b.m. of British" Columbia fir wharf and crib timber. 75,691 ft. b.m. of British Columbia fir in select dressed scow timber.
The above was transported by steamer after the opening of the Panama canal.
4 octagonal pieces 29 inches by 29 inches by 72 feet long, dredge spuds. 1 piece 16 inches by 16 inches by 76 feet long dredge spuds. 1 piece 14 inches by 14 inches by 84 feet long derrick boom.
In addition to the above Toronto orders, about 4,250,000 ft. b.m. of other Canadian native timber was purchased for building construction, interior of cribs, and for such other purposes as this kind of timber could be utilized.
5.	The phrasing of this question is not clear. The transportation cost of any particular shipment is dependent upon the particular vessel utilized for its conveyance, and upon the nature of other cargo carried by the vessel. Separate costs for each commodity have not been kept. In general the average cost of transporting freight of all kinds to Port Nelson was $56.65 per ton in 1913, $13.59 per ton in 1914 and;$9.62 per ton in 1915. The direct lightering charge at Port Nelson was $2.75 per ton in 1914, and $2.50 per ton in 1915.
6.	All of the timber delivered at P6rt Nelson will be used in the work.


RAILWAY DEPARTMENT CLERKS.
Mr. TURRIFF:: 1.	How many clerks are there in the Railways and Canals Department who belong to and are paid from the outside service vote and who work in the inside service?
2.	What are the names of said clerks?
3.	What salary is paid to each?
4.	How long has each been in the service of the department?
5.	Have all or any of these clerks passed any examination? If so, what examination and on what date or dates?


Mr. REID:: None.


MILITIA DEPARTMENT CLERKS.
Mr. TURRIFF:: 1.	How many clerks are there in the Militia Department who belong to and are paid from the outside service vote and who work In the inside service?
2.	What are the names of said clerks?
3.	What salary is paid to each?
4.	How long has each been In the service of the department ?
5.	Have all or any of these clerks passed any examination? If so, what examination and on what date or dates?


Mr. KEMP:: Temporary employees not paid from war appropriations or civil government contingencies :
Engineers Services, D. G. E. S.-W. B. Wilson, civil engineer, D.G.E.S., appointed December I, 1914; $3 per diem. E. S. Landry, draughtsman, D.G.E.S., appointed October 4,1915, $2.50 per diem. B. J. Frank-lyn, clerk, D.G.E.S., appointed July 11, 1914; $2.25 per diem. R. D. Thexton, draughtsman, D.G.E.S., appointed July 7, 1913, $3 per diem. H. A. F. Bowman, draughtsman, D.G.E.S., appointed May 13, 1915, $2.25 per diem.
Topographic survey, D.G.E.S.-F. Hewitt, draughtsman, D.G.E.S., appointed October 1, 1915, $3.35 per diem. J. G. Des Rivieres, draughtsman, D.G.E.S., appointed October 1, 1915; $3.35 per diem. J. A. Cutts, draughtsman, D.G.E.S., appointed December, 1915; $100 per month. M. Fallis, clerk, D.G.E.S., appointed December, 1915; $50 per month.
None of the above have passed any examination or have been granted any certificate by the,Civil Service Commission, so far as is known.


J. P. DIONNE VS. THE KING.
*Mr. GAUVREAU:: Did the Postmaster General receive a telegram or other correspondence, confidential or otherwise, from Mr. Leo B6rub6, M.P.P., of RiviSre du Loup, concerning the production of certain documents In the case of J. P. Dionne vs. the King, and laid before the House by the Minister of Justice?


Mr. CASGRAIN:: There is no official correspondence in the department with regard to the matter.


BOUNTY ON ZINC OR SPELTER.
[Stage Direction]
Sir THOMAS WHITE (Minister of Finance) moved that the House do to-morrow go into committee on the following proposed resolutions:
Resolved, that it is expedient to authorize the payment out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of a bounty of two cents per pound on zinc or spelter, containing not more than two per cent of impurities, produced in Canada from zino ores mined in Canada; provided the standard price of zinc or spelter in London, England, at the time of production is less than £38.19.3 sterling per ton of two thousand two hundred and forty (2.240) pounds, when the bounty payable shall be an amount equal to the difference between such standard prices per ton and £36.19.3 per ton. Further provided, that in no event shall bounty be payable when the price received for zinc or spelter by the producer is 8 cents or more per pound, and that no bounty shall be payable on zinc or spelter to the producer during the continuation of the war, and in no event on zinc or spelter produced after July 31, 1917.
Further resolved, that the total amount payable under the provisions of any Act founded on
\
[Stage Direction]
these resolutions shall not exceed the sum of $400,000.
He said: In connection with these resolutions I desire to lay upon the table of the House a statement which was given to the press and mailed to producers of zinc in August last, which is explanatory of the legislation in question.
Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:: I would like to
call tne hon. minister's attention to the fact that the resolution recites that no bounty shall be payable on zinc or spelter to the producer during the continuation of the war, and it also provides that there shall be no payment after July 31, 1917. Is that correct?


Sir THOMAS WHITE:: This is a notice of motion. I do not quite understand the point that my hon. friend draws to my attention!; I shall be glad to consider it between now and to-morrow.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Was any Order in Council embodying a temporary arrangement with any smelters passed during the last three months?


William Thomas White: My recollection is that no Order in Council was passed. A statement was given to - the press and sent to the zinc producers of Canada, promising that this legislation would be introduced in order to ensure the production of zinc in Canada for the purpose of use in the manufacture of munitions. I have brought down the statement which was given to the press and to the zinc producers. I think it will explain what my hon. friend desires to know.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. LEMIEUX:: Whilst I do not object to the censoring of foreign letters, and agree that it is necessary during rvar time, I must enter a most emphatic protest against the opening of letters addressed to me at my residence in Ottawa from points in Canada. For the third time since last summer letters addressed from Montreal to Ottawa have been censored. I quite understand that letters coming, for instance, from the United States or from Europe might be censored, tout I think, that my hon. friend should instruct his officers in Montreal not to open domestic leters. He should appoint men of intelligence who would not be so impertinent as to open letters written from points in Canada.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: I think my hon. friend is perfectly right. The opening of his letters must have been the result of some stupid blunder. Instructions will be given to see that nothing of that kind occurs again.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: I was just about to rise to make the same complaint. I received, a letter to-day from Montreal, censored. I think I am well enough known for my Canadian correspondence to be free from suspicion. If my correspondence were coming from a foreign country, perhaps some over-zealous official might think it treasonable; but the censoring of mail coming from Montreal, I think, is more stupid than anything else. It should be looked into.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: It will be looked into.


Mr. GRAHAM:: I have had the same
experience. A letter coming to Montreal from the Maritime Provinces has been opened and censored.


Sir ROBERT BORDEN:: I have had not quite the same experience, but one very similar. A letter which came from the United States to me was handed into my office this morning, opened and censored.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: I am In the same
position myself.


ALLEGED OMISSION FROM HANSARD.
[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Wilfrid Laurier: Mr. Speaker,
a few days ago I called your attention to an error that had taken place in the report of a sitting of the House by a Hansard reporter, in some remarks made by the Minister of Militia. The Prime Minister then suggested that the matter should be dealt with by the Committee on Debates, of which suggestion I quite approved. I do not know that this committee has since been called together.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I wish to say to the House that I think it would be more desirable to await the return of the hon. the Minister of Militia before making any correction. As the right hon. gentleman knows, there is a rule which states that if a member declares what the words are that he actually used, his statement must be accepted. So I think it would be desirable to wait until the Minister of Militia has returned.


Wilfrid Laurier: I have no objection at all to waiting until the Min-

ister of Militia is here, hut- I want the matter not to be forgotten. It should be looked into.


CASUALTY LISTS.
[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Albert Edward Kemp: Yesterday the hon. member for Medicine Hat (Mr. Buchanan) brought up the question of some change that had been made in respect to the publication of casualties. I may say that this change was based upon instruction from the Army Council of the British Government. I presume it was a general order, and I have no doubt that the object was to prevent information from getting back to the enemy. But, however that may be, the order has been modified in such a way that, commencing with to-day, there will be no difficulty in identifying the soldier referred to in any casualty list.


MUNITIONS WORKS COMMISSION.
[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
George Perry Graham: I wish to ask the Minister of Labour if it is true that a commission has been appointed to investigate conditions surrounding workers in munitions establishments, and, if so, what the duties and powers of that commission are.


Mr. CROTHERS:: A commission has been appointed to inquire into labour conditions in munition factories in Toronto and Hamilton. The appointment was made under the Inquiries Act.


WAR SUPPLIES-HORSES.
[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. SMITH:: I notice an article in this morning's Citizen which says that British army officers have resumed the purchase of horses in Kansas City to-day after a lapse of six months. Is it the intention of the Canadian authorities to urge upon the Imperial Government that further purchases of horses should be made in Canada?


Robert Laird Borden: The importance of the purchase of horses in Canada has been urged upon the Imperial Government on a great many occasions. I do not know anything of the question to which my hon. friend has alluded except through the newspaper paragraph which he has quoted. I will make inquiry on the subject and take any steps that seem to be possible in the matter.


TABER IRRIGATION DISTRICT.
[Stage Direction]
On motion of Hon. W. J. Roche (Minister of Interior), Bill No. 84, to authorize certain school and Dominion lands to be included in the Taber Irrigation .district in the province of Alberta, was read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. J. DOHERTY (Minister of Justice) moved the second reading of Bill No. 86, to amend the Prisons and Reformatories Act.
George Perry Graham: What is this Bill about?


Mr. DOHERTY:: As I explained when the Bill was introduced, certain establishments designed as industrial farms have been established by the Ontario Government for the reception of prisoners sentenced to a term of imprisonment shorter than a penitentiary sentence. Under present conditions the Ontario Reformatory, and, I think, one other institution come under the provisions of the Prisons and Reformatories Act. One purpose of this Bill is to extend those provisions so as to make them applicable to the other institutions known as industrial farms. Besides the one attached to the reformatory at Guelph, there is one at Toronto, which is about completed; one at Fort William, and one at Burwash. In addition to making certain sections applicable to these institutions, there are sections giving power to the provincial authorities to transfer from the* common jails to the reformatory, or to the industrial farms, prisoners sentenced to the common jail, and, where conditions render that course necessary, or desirable, to order their return to the common jail.
There are sections also specifically making the dispositions in the first section of the Act, with regard to prisons for male prisoners, applicable to similar institutions established for female prisoners. There is a further provision conferring upon what is known in Ontario as the parole board powers to be exercised in dealing with prisoners who have been sentenced to indeter minate sentences; that it to say, prisoners upon whom the courts, under the provisions of the law, have imposed a sentence of, say, not less than three months, of of not more than twenty-four months. The parole hoardi is a body constituted by the Lieutenant Governor, and has been in existence for some years. It is now charged

with looking into the cases of different prisoners, and at present make recommendations to the Department of'Justice looking to their release. This confers upon them powers to deal with prisoners, during that period of the sentence which is indeterminate, in the way of allowing them to he released from close custody under obligation to report, and under surveillance, subject to conditions which shall toe approved by the Minister of Justice. It further confers upon them a power, after the terms and conditions in regard to any such prisoner have been complied with, to report to the Minister of Justice recommending liberation. These different dispositions are considered of importance by the provincial authorities for the purpose o>f carrying out more effectively their views with regard to the reformation of prisoners. It has seemed to us that these provisions asked for, would undoubtedly have that result, and should be encouraged to enable the system tO' be carried out under the best possible conditions. Personally, I am disposed to think that the hopes of the Ontario authorities with regard to its success will be fulfilled. In any event, under these provisions there will be opportunity to give the system a full and a fair trial.
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM: This action of the Minister of Justice is in line with the view that I have entertained for a good many years. From remarks that I have had occasion to make on the question of capital punishment, the minister knows that my views arc strongly along the line that there is something in nearly every human being to reform, if we can get at it, and that every opportunity ought to be given to develop that which is best in the individual who has been convicted of a crime of greater or less magnitude. The object of punishment for crime committed is not primarily to get even, if I might put it in ordinary parlance, with the man who [DOT]has committed a crime; nor is it one of revenge. The great object of punishment is the protection of society in order that the crime committed by the individual may not be repeated by some other individual. That is, I believe, the prime cause of action against men who have committed crimes. But there is a second object, or there ought to be, and that is the reformation of the individual who lias committed the crime, perhaps under some great stress, perhaps under mental pressure of which even the 
courts know nothing or are unable to ascertain in the strictest trial. Holding that view, I have always maintained, as the minister knows, that capital punishment ought to be abolished, and that society would be protected just as well toy imprisonment for life, while the opportunity would toe afforded to the criminal to reform.
This Bill is along these lines, although it applies to those who have been convicted of crimes not of a capital nature. For a time, a 6hort time I admit, the central prison in Toronto was under the department over which I presided in the Provincial Government, and one of the things that struck me during the first few weeks of my tenure of office was the absolute impropriety of confining in a prison all prisoners who had been convicted to serve a term of less than two years without giving .them any opportunity for reformation during that period. The crimes were trivial perhaps, (and without reflecting upon the bench at all, we know that its occupants have livers, and that -sometimes they do not work in the same sympathetic way as they do at other times, so that a man or a woman convicted of a comparatively trivial offence will get a term of two years less than one day, which seems extreme at times. There is no doubt that in that individual there is something good which, if appealed to in the proper way, would develop in such an manner that the punishment might be cut in half, or even further reduced. In committing these smaller offences particularly, the individual is often moved by a momentary impulse, and there is nothing radically criminal in his or her make-up. But if that individual is confined, and deprived of the opportunity of mingling in ' a measure with the outside world, and of retaining his manhood or her womanhood, my view is that they become worse instead of better, anid that punishment becomes a deterrent of good citizenship rather than an encouragement of it.
The Central prison in Toronto is in the heart of the city, in a district which was not always -so populous as now, but in the midst of the hum of a great thriving ei-tv like Toronto is no place for a central prison. The taking of -these prisoners out of that institution; the -passing of this law; the action o-f the Ontario Legislature in establishing industrial farms; the giving of an opportunity to the prisoner to get out into the open air

because his surroundings have a great deal to do with the working of a prisoner's mind-all this is a step in the

right direction, and I believe that we shall do a great deal more in this direction during the next few years than we have done in the past.
I have always taken a deep interest in this particular phase of our public policy and have at times perhaps been considered meddlesome and somewhat of a nuisance. I have even been accused of interfering with the course of justice; but the hon. minister can understand the viewpoint from which I look at these matters. My conduct has never been impelled by the desire to interfere with the law, but I have always held strenuously to the idea that we ought to treat these unfortunate people in the most humane manner possible and give them every opportunity to return again to good citizenship. I have experienced the difficulty, particularly in respect to boys sent to the reformatory, that the police magistrate and the chief of police find it very difficult to get themselves into a frame of mind to assist in securing the release on parole of a boy whom they have sent to the reformatory. Thy seem to hesitate, considering it as a reflection on their judgment. In making my appeals to them, I have never looked at the matter in tjiat light. I have argued with them that they were not casting any reflection upon their own judgment or conduct by lending a little aid, if necessary, to get a young person out of the reformatory. This legislation will, I think, be in a measure a hint to some that Governments are beginning to look on the law and its execution from a different angle; that one of the chief objects is the reformation of the individual in conjunction with the protection of society. I have not carefully considered the details of the Bill, but I understand that the principle is as I have stated, and that it goes a little further and allows a person convicted an opportunity to make good under the new privileges, and that if the individual does make good, he or she will have an opportunity to be restored to society in a much shorter time than under the old conditions.


Mr. A. C. MACDONELL (South Toronto):: I would like to say a word or two in support of this legislation. Like the hon. member for South Renfrew (Mr. 'Graham), I believe this is simply pioneer legislation, and that before very long we shall have much more legislation of this character on the statute books, because most people to-day realize that prison life, just as every other kind of life, is going
through a process of evolution. This Bill has been foreshadowed for some time.
As the hon. member for South Renfrew has said, the Central Prison, which is the jail or penitentiary for the province of Ontario, was situated, and what is left of it is still (Situated, in a very populous part of the city of Toronto. It has now been removed to Guelph, where there is a splendid institution, to study which those who are interested in the reformation of mankind and in prison reform have sent delegates from all parts of the States. It is regarded as a model institution designed to assist in the reform of unfortunate criminals, and it is doing magnificent work.
In 1914 the legislature of Ontario, realizing the good work that is being done by the Industrial Farm at-Guelph, and feeling that wider legislation is required along that line, passed an Act respecting industrial farms, empowering any city or county to establish, in lieu of the old common jail for its locality, an industrial farm, to which the prisoners would be transferred from the common jail and treated in a manner better calculated to incite them to mend their ways	and to begin
the leading of a better life. The common jail of the county	of York was
like the Central prison, in a thickly populated part of the city of Toronto and some four or five hundred prisoners were kept there; it was not desirable either for the prisoners or for the community that they Should be there. Acting upon that legislation, the city of Toronto has spent about $450,000 in buying land a few miles from Toronto where they have established the Hill Crest farm, on which they are now treating a large number of prisoners on the prison reform basis. The prisoners are there given a chance to breathe the fresh air, to begin life anew; every opportunity is afforded to them to become good citizens again. Although the Central prison in Toronto wsa an immense place surrounded by an 'almost unsealea'ble wall, the record is that fewer prisoners have escaped from Guelph where they are at liberty to run away than used to escape over the high walls of the Central prison, which proves that if men are treated humanely, they are satisfied to serve their prison term, and prompted to endeavour to lead honourable lives. Up to the present, the difficulty in dealing with offences under the Criminal Code-and most offences for which men are committed to jail are code offiences-has been that the committing magistrate or

judge has power to send convicted prisoners only to the common jail of the county where the offence is committed or any other common jail that he may designate, there being no provision (until this legislation is passed to commit prisoners or convicts to any industrial or prison farm. It is because of that difficulty that this legislation has been introduced. The province of Ontario, having first established a large farm at Guelph, has now established two prison farms, one at Sudbury and the other at Fort William, in one of which an entire township is occupied, where the prisoners breathe an atmosphere of liberty and are given an opportunity to again become good members of society.
This amendment applies to both males and females; it includes those who may be transferred from the Mercer reformatory to an industrial farm, and the industrial farm now established in connection with the common jail of the county of York has ample accommodation for both male and female prisoners. If this amendment is passed, it will offer, inducements to and encourage other 'counties, municipalities, and cities, not only throughout Ontario, but in the other provinces of the Dominion, to establish industrial farms, which will mean a real and substantial reform in the treatment of prisoners. I commend the legislation in every way to the members of 'the House.


Mr. MORPHY:: I would crave the indulgence of the House for a' moment to draw the attention of the Minister of Justice to a case which has come to my notice, of a person convicted of a criminal offence in western Ontario. Under the law applying to the case, this person was sentenced in open court, in the presence of his mother, a coterie of his friends, and the public, to a period of one year. The prisoner was sent to the place of incarceration, where by good conduct, splendid deportment, obedience to the rules and regulations, he hoped to be accorded the usual allowance off his sentence for good conduct. His good conduct entirely justified him in making that request, but when he made it, to his pain and mortification, it turned out, that although the sentence pronounced in open court in the presence of the public had been imprisonment for one year, he was still subject to a further year by way of indeterminate sentence, although the judge had pronounced nothing of the kind in open court.


Mr. PUGSLEY:: Does the Minister of
Justice agree with that interpretation of the law.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I do not think it is a correct interpretation of the law. In one or two instances I understand the law providing for indeterminate sentences has been interpreted in that sense, and it has certainly been a matter of surprise to me.
Mir. iPUGSLHY:	To me too. I never
heard of such a thing.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: I had never heard of it before, and that is why I am bringing the matter before the House, so that the case may go 'on Hansard for the consideration of those who are charged with the administration of criminal justice, and in order that such an abuse may not	occur in the	future.	In all
fairness to the prisoner and the the public at large, I think that a judge when sentencing a prisoner convicted of an indictable offence, should be compelled to state the length of the sentence. It is absolutely unfair that a prisoner should be sent to a prison under the idea that he has to serve only one year, and then for him to find that not only has he not the opportunity of getting the sentence reduced by good conduct, but that owing to a peculiar interpretation of the law, he has to serve a further period of one year. I agree with the remarks of the hon member for South Renfrew as to the object of punishment. But this was a case of a young man taking his first false step, and after fulfilling the sentence pronounced by the judge, he found that the sentence had been doubled. I- do not think that kind of administration of justice,-I would rather call it administration of injustice-which puts the iron into the soul of a young man who has committed his first offence, will meet with the approval of the people of this country. I think it will have the effect of bringing the administration of justice into contempt, and of making a rebel against society out of a man who, although perhaps feeling that he deserves to be convicted, at the same time feels that he is being unjustly treated by having to serve two years when the judge only sentenced him for one.


Charles Joseph Doherty: One word with regard
to the particular case that has been mentioned. I said that I had heard that there had been such an interpretation .put upon the law. I may say that the particular case '

to which the hon. member refers came before us upon an application for release, but on the face of the documents sent to us it appeared that the judge had sentenced this young man to not less than one year, and not more than two, and of course the documents before us were all that we had to go' upon as to what the sentence actually was. It was represented in another case that the sentence had only been for a period less than two years, but there again we made inquiry of the court, and were assured that the sentence as returned to us was the sentence that had been pronounced. I confess, and perhaps it may be of some usefulness that I should say so, that I cannot possibly follow the interpretation put upon the section, which implies that the mere fact of a judge imposing one definite period necessarily carries with it a further indefinite period. As I understand it, the only section which empowers the imposition of these indeterminate sentences is section 44 of the Act that is now sought to be amended, and to my mind it is perfectly 'dear that it merely confers upon the judge the power of sentencing a man to a reformatory for a term of not less than three months', and for an indeterminate period thereafter of not more than two years. How it is inferred from that that if the judge did impose a definite sentence and added nothing more, that the balance of two years should automatically attach to the definite period pronounced, I confess I am unable to comprehend.


Mr. EDWARDS:: I presume the reason the prison farm was started at Guelph by the Ontario Government was because it had come to the conclusion that there was1 something in -a man, even if the law regarded him as a criminal, to which one might appeal for his own good. I think the farm has done a great deal of good, and I believe that this Act is also in the right direction. I must confess that a convicted criminal has my warm sympathy. I havie no maudlin sentiment for a man who commits an offence against the law; hp must be taught that he cannot violate the law without being punished; but I do think that more good could be accomplished by humane treatment, by appealing to the better side of a man's nature, than by confining him within four walls, and obliging him to consort with old and hardened criminals. There are reasons why we should have a great deal of consideration for the young fellow who has committed his first offence, and,
first of all, because under the laws as they exist to-day, a money value is placed upon crime. For instance, two men may commit the same offence. One of them, a rich man, imbibes too freely, becomes disorderly, and is run in by the police. Next morning the magistrate gives him the choice of paying $10 or going for thirty days, and having the $10 he pays it and goes home. Another fellow commits exactly the same offence, and is run in by the police. He comes before the magistrate, and is given the option of paying $10 or going up for thirty days. He has not got the money, and he goes up for thirty days. In other words, the law tells the man: You may become drunk and disorderly if you have enough to pay for it; and if you put up a sufficient amount of cash we will let it go at that; but if you have not the necessary amount of cash, we will consider your lack of cash to be represented by so many days in jail. That, on the face o.f it, seems to me a little unfair; and that is one reason why I think that some consideration should be given especially to the young fellows. What I wish particularly to say is, that if it is right-and I have not heard anybody dispute its wisdom-to establish the prison farm at Guelph with its mode of treatment of criminals, that policy ought to be extended to apply particularly to the young men who are first offenders and who are sentenced to longer terms than two years. This Bill applies only to the men who are sentenced for a period of two years or more. I hope to see the day when the boys and young men of from 17 to. 20 years of age, now sent to the penitentiary, will be given a chance such as these prisoners are given who are sent to the prison farm at Guelph. I honestly think that, under existing conditions, we legislators are committing far greater crimes in sending the boys to the penitentiary and obliging them to put in years at no other employment than breaking stone, than any that the boys or youths committed that caused them to be sent to the penitentiary. . I hope that1 this Bill, which is in the right direction, will, in the course of time, be extended, or that the policy that it embodies will be extended, to apply to the younger prisoners who are sentenced for the first time to the penitentiary, and so give them a chance to recover their manhood and become again good and useful citizens.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the . second time, and the House went into Committee thereon, Mr. Rhodes in the Chair.
[Stage Direction]
On section 1-Prisoners may be sentenced to Industrial Farm, etc:
William Pugsley: I am very greatly impressed with what my hon. friend from Frontenac (Mr. Edwards) has said. It appears that, while this .Bill iis in the right direction, it is desira'ble that similar provision should be made with reference to prisoners who may be confined in the penitentiary. It often happens that judges sentence boys to the penitentiary whom other judges would have sent to the jail. It does seem to me, instead of allowing the reform of the penitentiaries to stand until some distant time,, that now, when we are dealing with this question, is the time to provide for those prisoners sentenced to the penitentiary as well as for those who are provided for in the Bill. I would suggest to the Minister of Justice that, having heard the expression of opinion by hon. members of the House, he should consider whether he might not take a little time and try to extend the provisions of this Bill so as to give a discretion to the minister, or to his officials, to exercise some clemency in respect of persons who may be confined in' the penitentiary. I think it most unfortunate that young lads who have not been guilty of any previous offence, and whose character is in the formative stage, should be kept confined in the penitentiary, there to mingle with hardened criminals and so have their lives practically destroyed. I do not see why a move in the same direction might not be made with regard to prisoners confined in the penitentiary, allowing the Department of Justice tp make arrangements with the provinces, by means of which the prisoners might be sent to the industrial farms and treated the same as the other prisoners there. I think this Bill is a move in the right direction, but we ought not to stop here, but should go further and act upon the suggestion which has been made.


William Cameron Edwards: I desire to add one word in corroboration, of what the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley) has said. In the course of the prison investigation it was brought out that a boy of 16 or 17, whose name I have forgotten, had been sentenced by a magistrate, from the county of Hastings, I think, to a term of four or five years in the penitentiary. His offence was the stealing from the farmer with whom he was employed of an old silver watch and about two dollars and a half in money. The magistrate thought that in the penitentiary he might learn a trade. Probably the magis-

trate's intention was good. But the boy was sent to work on the stone pile alongside of old criminals, some of whom had been in prison for years. It was impressed on my mind, as I think it must have been impressed on the mind of every person who read the evidence, that here was a miscarriage of justice and a decided wrong.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Would the hon. member state how long ago that was.


William Cameron Edwards: His term must be very nearly up now. It seemed to me that the last chance that boy had of be-4 p.m. coming a good and useful citizen was taken away from him when he was sentenced to four years at labour of that kind. This is an illustration of a decidedly wrong method, one that it is our bounden duty to change at the earliest opportunity.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: I would call the attention of the hon. member to the fact that evidently this case was adjudicated upon before the passage of the Industrial Farms Act.


William Cameron Edwards: Very likely.


Charles Joseph Doherty: There is no doubt that it would be desirable that in the penitentiaries, as far as possible, we should arrive at a method of getting.young prisoners separated from older and more hardened offenders.
As to the sentence that has just been referred to, that, of course, is a matter which is in the hands of the judge. If the sentence was too long or too heavy- and upon the statement of fact's as made by the hon. member it would look as if it were-that shows a lack of judgment on the part of the magistrate who pronounced it. As to the suggestion of the hon. member for St. John that we should amend this Bill with a view to doing something with regard to penitentiaries, I would point out that an amendment' in that line would hardly be relevant to the subject matter of this Bill. Whether we ought to take action in that regard is another question, but' we are now dealing with the institutions under the control of the provincial authorities. Improvement in penitentiaries necessitating legislation would form, I think, the proper subject matter of an amendment to the Penitentiaries Act. It does happen from time to time that" young boys are sentenced to a penitentiary where it would be better to sentence them to other institutions, but we, of course, have to receive into the penitentiaries those who are sentenced

to them. I do believe that if we could bring about a system under which our prisoners could be separated into classes, it would be a great advantage. The question has had much consideration and examination, and it seems to me that practically th' only effective way of doing that would be to establish separate institutions. The dividing up of prisoners within the same institution is attended with very great difficulty. Of course, the providing of separate institutions for different classes of prisoners would involve our undertaking the establishing of new institutions. I hope that it may not be very long before we shall be able to do that, but the present time does not seem to be the most propitious for the undertaking of large expenditures in.that direction. In the meantime we do endeavour as far as possible to protect the youthful prisoner. In the exercise of clemency the youth of the prisoner and the fact of its being his first offence is always given the most serious consideration. As to the case referred to, I have not the exact facts at the moment, and therefore I am not in a position to speak particularly with regard to it. Section 1 of this Bill applies sections 18 to 20 of the Prisons and Reformatories Act to the industrial farms. Under the law as it now stands, these provisions are applicable to the Ontario reformatory and to the Mercer reformatory. The substance of the sections of the present Act is that any judge sentencing a prisoner to any of these institutions may sentence such prisoner for a term not more than one-sixth longer than the term at present prescribed by law for the offence, and any such sentence may be carried out in such prison, although it is for any term not exceeding two years and four months. The next section establishes in these prisons a system a remission analogous to that which exists in the penitentiaries, providing that the prisoner may by good conduct and industry earn five days per month. There is a sliding scale which runs up as high as ten days per month. The third section provides that breach of the prison laws and regulations may entail deprivation of this remission. The whole effect of the first section of this Bill is to make these three sections, which are already applicable to the reformatory institutions that I have mentioned, applicable to the industrial farms that have been and are being established.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 2-Board of Parole:
Charles Joseph Doherty: The Lieutenant Governor in Council of Ontario has, under legislation enacted by that province, appointed what is called a Board of Parole. Under this legislation, the Board of Parole has power to look into the cases of persons imprisoned for violation of provincial law. The legislature could not, of course, deal with the cases of persons condemned under the Dominion law. The purpose of this section is to give to this Parole Board, in cases where persons are sentenced for indeterminate periods-as, for instance, under the section to which I referred a few minutes ago, where a person may be sentenced to any of these reformatory institutions for a period of not less than three months and not more than twenty-four months-the power of releasing the prisoner from close confinement upon conditions to be laid down and submitted to and approved by the Minister of Justice. It goes on further to provide that in such cases, where the conditions have been complied with by the prisoner, this Parole Board may recommend a prisoner for final discharge. It was not necessary, perhaps, to confer tnat last power by statute, but its being put in the statute gives the recommendation of the board an official status. I may say that such recommendation on the part of the Parole Board would almost invariably be followed.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time, and passed.

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Rhodes in the Chair.
Steam service between Halifax, Mahone bay, Tancook island and La Have river ports, $4,000.
["I wish to undo an injustice which I think I did to Mr. Black when the Yukon estimates Were up before. On that occasion I stated that Mr. Black, who is clerk of the Yukon Council and\n\nPublic Administrator, had to have his accounts passed by the court, and that as he was frequently appointed judge of the court, his accounts would either have to stand or be passed by himself. I was informed a day or two ago that the accounts of the Public Administrator of the Yukon are audited, not by the judge of the court, but directly from 'Ottawa, an officer going from Ottawa every year for the purpose. I think it only right to make that correction.\nProgress reported.\nOn motion of Mir. Rogers, the House adjourned at 10.50 p.m.\nFriday, April 14, 1916."]
Mr. TURRIFF:: Is it considered necessary now to have all these subsidies for this traffic? Would not the traffic pay for the services without subsidies?


Sir GEORGE FOSTER (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Whilst on general principles it may be thought that these subsidies are not necessary, and that with the building of railways they ought to be done away with, yet, taking this service, fo.r instance, it is a service which is not provided for by railways in any way. It is a coast service running from Halifax westerly, and doing work which has to be done by vessels and which cannot be done in any other way.

There is quite an amount of traffic. It is not like an Atlantic or a Pacific service in amount, but it is equally important to the people who are served by it as the larger services are to the larger scope of trade and traffic which is served by them. Last year, on this service, there were carried 4,820 tons of freight. The amount of subsidy earned and paid was $3,000. This is a trip subsidy, and if trips are omitted they are not paid for, so isometimes a less total sum will be paid than is provided for by the subsidy.


John Gillanders Turriff: I was not objecting to
that particular item, but I wanted the information.


George Eulas Foster: Most of these
coast services are of that class.


George Perry Graham: Inquiry arose in the
House the other evening, when the Estimates of the Postmaster General were going through, as-to the basis on which these subventions were given, and as to the cost of carrying the mail, and the number of steamship companies that were being paid for carrying the mail. The Postmaster General very correctly replied that that was very largely in the Department of Trade and Commerce Would the minister tell us just the basis on which the mails are carried?


George Eulas Foster: These services, what we call local services, are not primar

 ily mail services, but every one of them is under contract to carry whatever mails may be placed on board, and quite a number of them do carry mails. The larger ocean services, such as those on the Pacific from Vancouver and Victoria to the Far East, are steamship subsidies, and come under my department. We take the vote and we pay the cost of such a service. We carry the mails, and the Postmaster General has the arrangement of the mails and sees that they are despatched. There is no accounting from the Post Office Department to the Department of Trade and Commerce for mail carriage; it is a subvention which covers both the trade and the mails. Properly, I think, although the present system has prevailed from the time this service was inaugurated, there ought to be an accounting between the two departments so that we would know exactly the value of a service like that for mail purposes and its value for commercial purposes. That, however, in the inception was not adopted as a policy, and has not

been since. Exactly similar to that is the Atlantic mail service, where the Department of Trade and Commerce pays the subsidy and the steamships are obliged to carry the mail for that subsidy, and in that respect likewise there is no accounting 'between the two departments. Some time or other, when this war is over, I hope these two departments will get together and establish an atocounting system between them. It is obviously just that this 'should be done. The Post Office Department is supposed to carry the mails of the country. It gets the revenue and shows its accounts, 'but the Department of Trade and Commerce, on these two important routes, we will say, carries the mails and pays for them. That is, the country does not know exactly w'hat the cost of carrying its mail is. However, from the inception of this service many many years ago until the present time, that is the system which has been pursued.


George Perry Graham: How many steamship
lines really do carry the mails on the Pacific and on the Atlantic?


George Eulas Foster: 
George Perry Graham: It was slow.


George Eulas Foster: It was slow, but sometimes mail packages went by that route, and the service has been so much interrupted since the war that it has not amounted to very much.
Mail Subsidies and Steamship Subventions- local services-steam service between Halifax and Spry bay and ports in Cape Breton, $4,000.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: Is that the. service that called at Port Felix last year?
\


George Eulas Foster: This is the service Which serves the southeastern coast of Nova Scotia. It runs from Halifax, and touches, or did touch, at the point mentioned by my hon. friend, and then goes on to the Cape Breton ports.


John Howard Sinclair: Will the minister give the names of the different ports touched at?


George Eulas Foster: Halifax, Jeddore, Owl's Head, Tangier, Pope's Harbour, Ship Harbour, Sheet Harbour, Sober Island, Spry Bay, St. Peter's, Arichat, West Arichat, Poulamon and L'Archeveque. The minister has the general power of adding ports at which the vessels under this contract shall stop, but he has to be pretty cautious and reasonable in exercising that power, because he might ask them to stop at more places than the steamship owners had contemplated. when the subsidy was granted.


John Howard Sinclair: Has the contract been signed for the current year?


George Eulas Foster: It has been signed by the steamship company, and will be signed by me, and then I will take up with the company the question of adding one or two ports and try to do what I reasonably can.


John Howard Sinclair: If the minister will look at the list of ports he has read he will find that the first five or six are all in Halifax county. Then it jumps the whole of Guys-borough county, a distance of over 100 miles, without providing for a call until the vessels get to Cape Breton. It seems to ignore quite a long stretch of the coast where communication is very necessary. Last year, or the year before last, an arrangement was imade between the merchants of Port Felix and the owners of the ship to call at that point, which is in Tor bay. It is a village at which a somewhat thriving fish business is carried on, and it has no communication whatever except by that boat. The merchants, who were attempting to develop a fresh fish trade by sending their fish to Mulgrave and Halifax for sale, will be badly hit if they have no communication whatever. I have heard from them by letter and by telegraph, and there is quite a little excitement down there over the question. The owners, I believe, threatened to withdraw the ship for the present season unless, they obtained a larger subsidy. I understand that the subsidy amounts to $4,000, but if the minister has the power to add an additional port I would like very much if he would exercise
it, because it means that these merchants will have to give up business altogether if they fail to obtain communication. Their only alternative would be to salt their fish, or cure them in some other way, and that is not as profitable as sending them forward fresh.


George Eulas Foster: How far is it across from Port Felix to Queensport?


John Howard Sinclair: Probably eight or ten miles, but it is a rather mountainous country, with a very bad road, and it would be altogether out of the question to take the fish that way. It will be very inconvenient to those people if no steamboat calls. I know the minister will do all he can, but I call his attention to the fact that the county of Halifax is rather generously treated, there being calls at five or six different ports, while, for over 100 miles along the coast no call is made at all. He will see that it is unusual for such a long distance to be ignored. Some of the ports in Halifax county are very small, and I question whether they have anything like the business that is done at Port Felix. I hope the minister will take the matter up, and, if possible, arrange for a call to be made at that point.


George Eulas Foster: When the subsidy was first granted this was exclusively a Halifax county service, and, for a good many years, it went no further than Spry Bay. Two years ago, however, I think it was extended in order to assist the Cape Breton ports, so that, actually, it was a Halifax county service which was extended for the benefit of my hon. friend's county.


John Howard Sinclair: The subsidy was increased.


George Eulas Foster: Maybe it was. I have already given instructions to inquire of the people of Port Felix what their marketing output would be, and also of the steamship company what they carried there last year. I have asked the supervisor of steamship companies to make a report on the matter, and when that report is received I will deal with it as well as I can.
Steam service from the opening: to the closing of navigation between Kenora and Fort Frances, $8,000.


John Gillanders Turriff: What amount of business is done by this service? I have spent a couple of summers on the lakes and it does not seem to me there is enough business doing between Kenora and Fort Frances to justify this subsidy.


George Eulas Foster: 
Mr. HUGHES:: Have you a steamer for this service?


George Eulas Foster: The vessel that has plied on that route for the last three or four years, an excellent vessel and giving an excellent service, has, owing to the high prices brought about by war conditions, been sold and taken off the route. I have made arrangements to have the steamer Amelia take her place. The Amelia has been plying around the shores of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island for quite a number of years. This year she has been refitted, and if she is put into a thoroughly satisfactory condition, as they promise she will be, she will be put on that route. ,


James Joseph Hughes: She is a smaller and
slower vessel than the Sibyl. Will she get the full amount of the subsidy?
" Sir GEORGE FOSTER: I do not think she is as good a vessel as the Sibyl, but when the improvements have been made she will be a very eligible vessel. I sent advertisements to twenty-seven different companies, but got no answer from any of them with the single exception of the Amelia. Vessels are not to be picked up in every harbour nowadays, and it was touch and go between, getting the Amelia and having no service at all.


James Joseph Hughes: I think the Government purchased the Princess from the Prince Edward Island Navigation Company some years ago. She would be a very suitable boat for this service.


George Eulas Foster: That vessel was intended for special service, but I had a

partial promise of the Princess from the minister in case I could get no other vessel. I had that alternative in view.


James Joseph Hughes: She would be much better than the Amelia for that service.


George Eulas Foster: I hardly think she would, considering her draught.


James Joseph Hughes: The other day, when we were considering Bill No. 66, I asked if the Minister of Justice would insert a provision providing a .penalty for subsidized steamers carrying liquor in violation of the Bill we were then considering. He said the matter could be more effectively dealt with when the contract with these subsidized steamers was being entered into. I know conditions down there pretty well, and I am sure the law can be more easily evaded by steamers than by any other means. Some good might be done if the minister would draw the attention of the companies to this legislation, and to the penalties that will follow any violation of it. I fear that efforts will be made by those interested to use the steamers in violation of the law.


George Eulas Foster: With reference to that, I can only say that I would consider it my duty to call the attention of any subsidized company very sharply to any yiola-tion of the law that might occur, and I do not think such a call would be disregarded. From what I know of the people connected with this boat, I have no reason to believe that any such thing .would happen.


James Joseph Hughes: I was not referring to this boat particularly.


George Eulas Foster: My statement applies generally to all subsidized services. If they violate any of the laws of the Dominion I think they will be perfectly and thoroughly subject to discipline, and I shall have very great pleasure in calling attention to the matter.


James Joseph Hughes: I think the Sibyl advanced freight rates very considerably, almost doubled them, in fact.


George Eulas Foster: Oh, no; a slight advance, but not very great.


James Joseph Hughes: Is there any provision in the contract in regard to rates?


George Eulas Foster: Yes, in every contract.

Steam service between Mulgrave and Guys-borough, calling at intermediate ports, $5,500.


John Howard Sinclair: Has that contract been executed for the coming year?


George Eulas Foster: I think so.


John Howard Sinclair: Are the ports of call
the same as before?


George Eulas Foster: Yes.
Steam service between Pictou and Montague, calling at Murray harbour and Georgetown, $6,000.


James Joseph Hughes: I call the attention of
the minister to this item in connection with Bill No. 66, and state that the same remarks I made before apply to this.


George Eulas Foster: I made a remark which covered all the services.
Steam service between Prince Edward Island and Cape Breton and Newfoundland, $16,500.


James Joseph Hughes: Has the department been able to secure a steamer for this service?


George Eulas Foster: As my hon. friend knows, the Senlac was burned and is not available for the service this year. She was probably not the best vessel that could have been obtained, but she was the only one that we could get last year, this service having been interrupted by the fact that the Dominion Coal Company's steamers did not carry on the service between Quebec and Newfoundland. I have been in communication with some parties and two vessels only have been in mind and communications are not yet carried out to the point where I would be able to say that a vessel was secured for the service, but I think the prospects are that we shall be able to obtain a vessel.


Mr HUGHES:: I understand that the
New York company, the owners of the steamer Florizel, which made one trip last year, I think


George Eulas Foster: No.


James Joseph Hughes: That would be a suitable steamer for this service.


George Eulas Foster: It has not been offered this year at all.


James Joseph Hughes: I think it could be secured.


George Eulas Foster: There weie negotiations last year with reference to the Florizel, but no contract was made and no service was performed.


James Joseph Hughes: I think she performed one trip whether she got a subsidy or not.


George Eulas Foster: She may have been making an examining tour, but she did it at her own expense.
Steam service from the opening to the closing of navigation in 1916, between Prince Edward Island and the mainland, $12,500.


James Joseph Hughes: Will the Steam Navigation Company perform this service as usual during the coming summer?


George Eulas Foster: Arrangements are not entirely completed as yet, but they have gone so far that I think I can say to the committee that the service will be carried on between Sumimerside and Pointe du Chene by the Northumberland and between Charlottetown and Pictou by another vessel.


James Joseph Hughes: The minister has the names in the wrong order. The Northumberland plies, between Pictou and Charlottetown, and the Empress between Summer-side and Point du ChSne.


George Eulas Foster: I think I am right.


James Joseph Hughes: This year?


George Eulas Foster: Last year, too. They may change off whilst one vessel is on the slip, but the steamer Northumberland plied between Summerside and Pointe du Chene. I went over on her myself. '


James Joseph Hughes: It must have been for one d^iy only.	-


George Eulas Foster: No. My hon. friend lives closer to the scene of action, but he is not correct.


James Joseph Hughes: Where does the Empress Ply?


George Eulas Foster: Between Pictou and Charlottetown, part of the time at least.


James Joseph Hughes: It does not make any
difference, but the minister has the names the other way around.


George Eulas Foster: I believe how
that my hon. friend is correct. The Empress has been disposed of and is not available for this service.


James Joseph Hughes: There will be no boat plying between Pictou and Charlottetown?


George Eulas Foster: There will be
a boat.


James Joseph Hughes: What boat will that be?


George Eulas Foster: I cannot say
exactly, but the service will be provided for.


James Joseph Hughes: The Empress is going
off the route.


George Eulas Foster: So I understand.


James Joseph Hughes: Can the minister say,
although it is not in his department, anything in regard to the car ferry service during the corning summer?


George Eulas Foster: The car ferry
service is not being carried on as such. The car ferry has been doing work between Pictou and Charlottetown, I think.


James Joseph Hughes: I mean for the coming
summer.


George Eulas Foster: I am not able to say anything about that. All I can say is what I have said, that a service will be carried on between those two points.
Steam service between Quebec and Gaspe basin, touching at intermediate ports, $8,500.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I understand that the
steamer was lost last fall. What kind of a service have you now?


George Eulas Foster: The Lady of
Gaspe was unfortunately lost. She was a very good vessel and well adapted to that traffic. Arrangements have been made this year with the owners of the Gaspesien and another vessel whose name I do not just now remember. The service will be carried on between Quebec and Gaspe basin under contract with that company.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Will the vessels call at the usual intermediate ports?


George Eulas Foster: The same poTts of call as were served la6t year.


Rodolphe Lemieux: My hon. friend says that the Lady of Gaspe was an excellent boat. That is quite true, but she met with an accident on the river and was sold for scrap iion. She was repaired and is now tramping the southern seas and making something like $15,000 a month. That is the latest news I have.
Sir GEORGE FOSTER; And I suppose the saddest people on that coast are those who sold her for scrap iron.


Mr. BOULAY:: Is the vessel obliged to come to the wharf at Mechins or does it wait in the middle of the channel to take on and land passengers or freight?


George Eulas Foster: My hon. friend brought that to my attention before and I have asked for information, but it is a little difficult to get it 'because the company that owned the vessel are no longer responsible and we have not been able so far to get that information from them. I have inquired of some resident officials who may be near there. You have a customs officer at either of those places?


Herménégilde Boulay: No.


George Eulas Foster: You have a harbour master?


Herménégilde Boulay: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: He will be the man from whom we shall prolbafbly get our information as to what calls were made last year. When I get the information, I will be glad to send it to my hon. friend. The only trouble about calling at some of these places,. I believe, is lack of sufficient depth of water.


Rodolphe Lemieux: As I was the father cf this service, I may calL the service my baby.


George Eulas Foster: Dangerous, in
these days-there may be an explosion.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I agree with the state-'
ment of my hon. friend from Rimouski (Mr. Boulay). As the minister is making a new arrangement with other parties to carry on the service, I hope he will see to it that the small ports get the benefit of the service. The very object of this subsidy is to secure direct communication between these ports and Quebec and Montreal. The company, of course, is always glad to stop at as few small ports as possible. The service is the fishermen's regular trade route between Matane and Gaspe and the large centres. Some years ago the fishing industry was practically stagnant in the ports of Gaspe, Rimouski and Matane, but since the establishment of this service the merchants and fishermen have benefited considerably. I hope the minister will stand by the fishermen in this eternal quarrel with the owners of the steamers. Let the steamers stop at these small ports. The service was created for that very purpose.


Herménégilde Boulay: I desire to say a word as an addition to my former remarks, and in answer to the letter written by the owners of the steamer. They say that they could not call at Mechins on account of the lack of water. I do not know ho\v much water

their steamer draws, but there is a depth of 17 feet at low tide at Mechins wharf- that is the report I have from the people of that place. So I think it is only because they do not want to stop that they do not get to the wharf. These people are isolated from all railways, and when we pay a subvention to a company they ought to pay more attention to these ports where there is no railway than they do to other ports. As the people of that region depend on that vessel, the vessel ought to stop every time it can reach the wharf. It will not do to say, as they do in their answer, that they whistle, and, seeing nobody, they go on. If they pass at night, of course the people fcannot stay awake for the vessel, particularly when they are not advised, this being a place where there is no telegraph system. It is for the vessel to come to the wharf and not for the people to go and meet her in the middle of the channel.


George Eulas Foster: The Gaspesien
draws 11 feet of water, and the Percessian 19J feet. If there is 17 feet of water at that port, the Gaspesiem would have no excuse for not calling. I have no hesitation in saying that this service, being chiefly for the small ports that have no railway communication, the companies are looked after carefully, and when we get reports that they are not calling we immediately call them to time. Sometimes we do not get a report for long afterwards.


Mr. MACDONALD:: May I refer to items that were considered while I was absent; what tenders were received for the Magdalen island service?


George Eulas Foster: I stated that we had sent out twenty-seven calls for tenders, and had received only one reply, and that was on behalf of the steamer Amelia. That vessel has been accepted for the service as the only one we could get, provided that she is repaired sufficiently to do the work.


James Joseph Hughes: WheTe are the repairs
being made?


George Eulas Foster: In Halifax,
where they do all the work for Nova Scotia.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: She will receive
$18,000?


George Eulas Foster: The subsidy is
$18,000; but it came to a showdown; $24,000 was asked, and at last, rather than go without a vessel, I made them an offer of $20,000. I shall ask for $2,000 more in the
Supplementary Estimates. This is one service, as my hon. friend knows, that cannot be done without.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Yes. I desire to
ask also what vessel is performing the service between Pictou, Mulgrave, and Cheti-camp?


George Eulas Foster: The Kinburn,
and the contractor is Roderick 5 p.nl. McDougall, of Port Hood, N.S. Last year, they carried 315 passengers and 1,145 tons of freight, and performed 67 trips.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Is the service supposed to start from Pictou? This is a service almost as historic as the Magdalen island service, and has always been performed from the port of Pictou. But trips from Pictou of late have been very rare. What is the cause of the change? There is a great deal of traffic with northern Inverness and always has been; but there is complaint from shippers in the county that the old-time service has been lessened. What change has been made, and why?


George Eulas Foster: Changes as to
ports of call?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: As to time of call.


George Eulas Foster: She starts from
Pictou and runs to Mulgrave. In order to make her time on the other route, and also owing to low water, bad wharves,-or no wharves, a part, of the coastline -along Nova Scotia was left out and its ports given a schooner service. The boat then goes to Mulgrave and thence north. So far as I can recollect, last year we bad very little if any complaint. I have heard from many sources that the service was satisfactory.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: How often does the boat make that trip?


George Eulas Foster: She makes one round trip every fortnight between Pictou and Mulgrave, calling both ways at Ari-saig, Georgeville, Cape George, Morristown, Malignant Cove, Livingstone Cove, Ballan-tyn-e Cove and Cribbin's Point. She makes two round trips each week between Mulgrave and Cheticamp, calling both ways at Port Hastings, Port Haiwkesbury, Port Hood, Port Hood Island, Margaree Harbour, Grand Etang and Eastern Harbour, and once each week at Pleasant Bay. She calls also, whenever required by the min-

ister, at Henry Island, Mabou Mouth, Inverness, Red Cape, and Port Bain.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The minister does not appreciate my point. The result of the change is, as the minister has said, that Antigonish ports have largely been left out, a coastal schooner service 'being given to the small ports. Instead of haying a weekly service from Pietou, we have a service only twice a month, and .to that extent the service has been reduced. The complaint that I have heard is that the combining of these two services would mean absolutely destroying the original trade that existed between Pietou and Antigonish and Chetieamp. The service has not been satisfactory; so far as our end of it is concerned it is impossible for one boat to make the necessary trips and give a satisfactory service.


George Eulas Foster: Several considerations are involved in this. If my impression is correct, I was anxious to make the change for two reasons. One was not to have the double service if one vessel could do the whole work and the other was that the amount of traffic between Pietou and the ports beyond was comparatively small. Then again, Mulvrave and Pietou are both points on the Intercolonial and we are anxious to carry as much as possible on our road. However, I think it is true, taking the records of last year and of this year especially, that it is the general opinion that the service has been satisfactory.


Mr. A. W. CHISHOLM:: Did the boat
make these trips regularly this year?


George Eulas Foster: Yes.


Alexander William Chisholm: I remind the
-.minister that I anticipated this difficulty when the change was made. I then told the hon. gentleman that one boat was not sufficient to carry on the service satisfactorily. I am not surprised that there is very little traffic between Pietou and Cheti-camp, because the present arrangement of one trip every fortnight is well calculated to destroy the traffic between those points. Does the minister say that the boat carried out its obligations in connection with the changed service?


George Eulas Foster: I am certain that it must have done so because it has been paid the subsidy and unless it had made all the necessary trips, there would be a deduction from the subsidy. The amount
[-ir George Foster.]
of the subsidy was $5,500. In 1914, there were 64 trips, and in 1915, 67. I will look the matter up and let my hon. friend know.


Alexander William Chisholm: Assuming that the boat goes to Halifax in winter, takes a full cargo from Halifax for persons in North Inverness, and in doing so is unable to take the freight that is waiting at Mul-grave for points along the coast, is that a failure to carry out the contract?


George Eulas Foster: The intent is to serve the country from Pietou from Mul-grave, and from Mulgrave north both ways. If the vessel winters at Halifax, I do not think much fault would be found if on her trip from Halifax to Mulgrave she took a load instead of proceeding empty, provided the people did not lose the service to which they were entitled. They are paid a trip subsidy, and if a trip is omitted they do not get the subsidy for it.


Alexander William Chisholm: There seems to have been considerable complaint last year on the part of merchants and others along the coast whose expectations of sending out freight by the first trip were disappointed on account of the boat having been filled . at Halifax. However, if these men have not made any representations to the minister, it is their own fault. Practically every year since 1911 I have drawn the attention of the minister to the lightering at at Margaree Harbour. In 1911 the company that had the service undertook to land the freight at their own expense, but this arrangement was discontinued. I have asked the minister on three different occasions if it would not be possible for him to make arrangements with the company to lighter the goods at this port. They have a great many disadvantages. It is a bar harbour, and I fear that people who are receiving goods will find the charges excessive. I do not charge this1 against the man who is lightering the goods, because he has to go to considerable expense in getting boats. The arrangement that existed before the year 1911 was most satisfactory, because the company undertook to lighter the goods and there was no trouble. The lightering is not done by the present company, nor was it done by the owners of the boat that preceded this one on the service. It should be possible to arrange to have the steamboat owners do the lightering, because it was done before.


George Eulas Foster: I have made a note of that and1 will inquire into it. If it is not included dn their contract I suppose they would not be called upon to do it.


Alexander William Chisholm: The company which had the contract from the Government before 1911 had to agree to that before securing the contract.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What arrangements have been made to provide the summer service between Pictou and Charlottetown? I saw a' statement in the press that the Prince Edward Island Navigation Company had disposed of both their boats. What does the minister expect to do in respect of this service? Have the Government purchased the boats and are they to be run as Government boats, or what arrangement has been made?


George Eulas Foster: All I can say at the present time is that arrangements are being made for carrying on the service between Pictou and Charlottetown, and between Summerside and Point du Chene. The Northumberland will be one of these boats. The Empress, I believe, has been disposed of, but- another boat will be placed on the route and a daily service will be maintained.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Is the minister in a position to state what boat will be employed ?


George Eulas Foster: Not quite. .It will probably be a Government boat.


William Pugsley: Has the Government acquired the Northumberland ?


George Eulas Foster: The Government is in negotiation for acquiring it.


Alexander William Chisholm: Has any application been made for a subsidy for a schooner on the coast of Inverness, from Halifax to points north?


George Eulas Foster: No.


Herménégilde Boulay: (Translation.) Mr. Chairman, I intend to say a few words in regard to the item now before the House. Twice already I have requested that provision be made for a boat service along the coast of the county of Rimouski, especially between Matane and the north coast. I would ask the minister to take note of my request so as not to forget me another year.	,
I see that our friends from the Maritime Provinces have obtained large subsidies. Some 35 or 40 items are for that purpose,
even in places which are reached by rail; while in the county of Rimouski, for which we have made the request, there are no railway facilities farther down than Matane. I ask the minister to make a note of what I say, so that another year he may see his way to providing for our needs, as is done in the case of the Maritime Provinces, with means of communicating with the north shore, which can only be by boat.


George Eulas Foster: It has been impossible to undertake new subsidies. But the war will be over some time; my hon. friend (Mr. Boulay) will live, I know, for many years, and all I can say to him today is to ask again.
Steam service between St. John, N.B., and St. Andrews, N.B., calling at intermediate points, $4,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What are the intermediate ports?


George Eulas Foster: The ports of
call are St. John and St. Andrews, the termini; and Dipper harbour, Black harbour, Back bay, Letite, and St. George.
Steam service between St. John and Digby,


William Pugsley: What steamer will perform this service ?


George Eulas Foster: The steamers that performed this service last year were the Yarmouth and the St. George. I think the Yarmouth is to carry on the service this year. There were not two boats on the route at the one time last year, but the Yarmouth .and the St. George were on at different periods.


William Pugsley: The minister will remember that when his Estimates were first before the committee I asked whether he could inform ns as to what portion of his Estimates he thought would not be required during the current year, and he said he would give us the information when the various items were considered. I think he will agree with me that there has been every disposition to facilitate the passing of his Estimates, and only one or two remain to be passed. At this stage, perhaps, he will inform the committee what proportion of the $2,641,934, which he has asked for the committee to vote, will not be required. I ask this with the view of ascertaining, if we can, how the $29,000,000, which the Minister of Finance said he expected to save out of the Estimates, will be made up. We had a very frank statement from the Minister of Public Works as to $10,000,000. No

doubt the Minister of Trade and Commerce will be rather astonished to learn that the Estimates for public works contain $10,000,000 more than will be required. However, we will not say anything more about that.


George Eulas Foster: I can give my
hon. friend information about that. Of the services that we have passed I do not know of one which, if no accident happens to the vessel, will not earn its full subsidy, or within a small amount of its full subsidy.


William Pugsley: That applies to all?


George Eulas Foster: To all with the exception of two. In regard to the Atlantic mail service, there is an item of $1,000,000. If the vessels numbered as many, and were of the same type as the year before last when the contract was made, I would expect that $1,000,000 to be earned, but, I am sorry to say, there is no probability this year that the same number of trips/'wi'll be made, or that the same class, of vessels will be used on the service, and therefore entitled to the subsidy. But I am not prepared to say-I am not asking that the item be passed just now -how much of it can be dropped, but when I do come to know what the service is, and what it will cost, anything over the cost will be dropped from the Estimates.


William Pugsley: Then the item will stand.


George Eulas Foster: Yes.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Can the minister say how long that item will stand? Is it because he has not negotiated the usual yearly contract with the company that it stands, or is it for any other reason?


George Eulas Foster: It is standing for two reasons. One is that I have not signed the contract yet, and I would like to know as nearly as possible before I do sign what vessels will he at the disposal of the company for the present season.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: What ports are to be named in the contract?


George Eulas Foster: The contract has not yet been concluded.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I understand that, but I thought the minister might tell me that.


George Eulas Foster: Perhaps I might. They are just the same as last year, either Halifax or St. John, at the option of the company. As my .hon; friend knows, that

question does not really arise this year, because the service has been carried on from the port of St. John this year, and it is within a few weeks of being finished. Then the ships will take the St. Lawrence route and go up to Montreal.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I am under the impression that I was informed by some of the officials of the Halifax Board of Trade that the Prime Minister or the Minister of Trade and Commerce had assured them that the contract for this year would provide that if the ships called at St. John they would also call at Halifax. Is that correct?


George Eulas Foster: No, that is not correct, I do not think the members of the Board of Trade told my hon. friend that.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I may be wrong, but
that is my impression.


George Eulas Foster: Probably what
was stated was this:	representations had
been made, and it was found that the Canadian Pacific Company were sailing their vessels 'from St. John. They objected to sailing them from Halifax because of the necessity for economizing time as much as possible under the present circumstances. Then I think the statement was made that if possible, and as far as possible, a portion of the subsidy would be diverted to the mails going from Halifax, if mail vessels could be found to go therefrom. As a matteT of fact, I think no mail vessels have gone from Halifax. The transports have gone from there, and that is how the situation stands, .so far as my recollection goes.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: How long does
the minister think it will be before the contract is ready for execution?


George Eulas Foster: I am holding the item, and I hope to have the contract executed before it passes.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Then we will have another opportunity to discuss it?


George Eulas Foster: Certainly.


John Gillanders Turriff: I would like the minister to take into consideration the question of freight rates. We are paying $1,000,000 for this subsidy, and the very steamers that are being subsidized are charging from five to ten times more for carrying wheat across the AtLantic than was charged formerly. Whereas formerly the rate was generally under 6 cents, and very seldom over 6 cents, during the past season it has

been up to 30, 36, 40, 42, and I am even told 45 cents, though I do not know .myself of any case over 42 cents. If they could make money carrying grain at 5 or 6 cents it seems to me unreasonable that we should pay them the same subsidy as in the past, when they are now charging from 35 to 42 cents. I should like the Minister to consider that point.


George Eulas Foster: I have considered it.


John Gillanders Turriff: When we pay $1,000,000 subsidy I think we should have some little say as to the freight rates. I know that some increase in rates is legitimate, because insurance on vessels is very much higher than formerly; but other costs, such as coal, wages, etc., are not higher to any great extent. The shipper, however, has to pay five and maybe ten times what he formerly paid for carrying his products across the water before the war. Perhaps the minister could give us some definite information on this matter when the item comes up again.


George Eulas Foster: I shall be prepared to say something definite on that occasion, although I do not know that 1 shall' be able to satisfy my hon, friend.


Mr. SCHAFFNER:: I think the minister should consider the point raised by my hon. friend from Assiniboia. His point is well taken.


John Gillanders Turriff: See that the minister satisfies me.


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: I should not like to undertake that. I am too well acquainted with my hon. friend (Mr. Turriff) to expect the minister to satisfy him. As I may not be in the House . when this item comes up again, I take this opportunity of saying that the point raised by my hon. friend should receive the serious consideration of the minister, and the committee should be given some definite statement upon the matter. I do not know to what extent these vessels carry wheat, but if they are carrying it to any great extent, and are getting 40 to 45 cents for it, they are making plenty of money without a subsidy. That is the only point I wish to make. These ships must be making money if they are carrying wheat to the extent I believe they are. But if they can show that an increase in insurance rates and other costs makes 40 and 45 cents a reasonable price, it is a different matter, and I am open to conviction. My
own opinion is that a great many of the ships are taking advantage of war conditions, and are making a great deal of money; if they are not, let them have the subsidy. But it is up to the Minister of Trade and Commerce to show that they are not making unusual profits before we grant them this $1,000,000.
Mr. PUGSLEY. While these steamers are carrying some grain, they are not carrying a great deal, I am told, because the bulk of Canadian grain to-day is going from United States ports. Portland is crowded with ships carrying Canadian grain to the markets of the Old World, and Canadian ports are getting very little of it. I think the Minister of Trade and Commerce will agree with me in that, and it is a point to which the hon. member for Souris should give attention, because it certainly is not in the interests of Canada that the grain of our great western country should be shipped in such immense quantities through American ports. That is something which many of us have been contending against for a preat many years, and I had hoped that the time had come when it would be no longer possible. In this connection, I was surprised not long ago to see that a railway company whose property this Government has committed Canada to owning to the extent of 49 per cent-the Canadian Northern-had advertised an embargo against western grain via the ports of Fort William and Port Arthur. The embargo did not apply to Duluth or any other American port; so Canadian ports have been rather unfortunate so far as the shipping of grain is concerned. While I am on my feet, I would say to the Minister of Trade and Commerce that I think the time has arrived when this Government should be enabled to announce that the Ministry has taken steps to encourage the building up of a Canadian merchant marine. Nobody knows how long this war is going to last, and the question of the transportation of Canadian products, particularly Canadian food products, to the Mother Country is becoming a most serious one. The public men of Great Britain are giving attention to it. It is stated that neutral vessels are becoming rather shy of taking the risk of being submarined, and are intimating that they can make enough money in other directions, and are thinking of withdrawing their vessels. To-day upwards of one-half of the food supply of Great Britain is carried in neutral vessels. We all know that there has been a great loss in the British mer-

chant marine. During the month of March alone, I believe that some 81 British vessels were sunk by submarines. The war has now been on for upwards of eighteen months. Canada has splendid opportunities for the building of ships on both coasts, and also upon the Great Lakes, where there are two very fine shipyards which have turned out as good vessels as can be built anywhere in the world; and the same remark will apply to the yards on both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. With a very little expenditure of money, the Government could secure the establishment of shipbuilding plants on both coasts, and the building of ships could be carried on very actively indeed, and they would prove of enormous benefit, not to Canada alone, but to the whole Empire. To-day, after being three months in session, and after having had our attention called to what has been brought up again to-day by the hon. member for Assiniboia and the hon. member for Souris-and we all know that rates have gone up a thousand per cent 'beyond what they were before the war-to me it is a matter for profound regret that up to this late date we have had no intimation that this Government proposes to encourage the building of ships in Canada, and the building up of a Canadian merchant marine.


George Eulas Foster: If we are going to have a debate on this matter, it is not quite fair that a portion should be flung in now, and left to do its deadly work until the answer is forthcoming. My hon. friend should have bottled up his enthusiasm oh this question, which was not so flaming and out-bursting when he was minister in an allpowerful Government in this country. He should have bottled that up and waited until we had the trenches manned on both sides and then we could have had a fair fight. I cannot, however, let my hon. friend's remarks pass without making two or three observations.
In the first place, my hon. friend said that }ie was sorry to know that Portland and other United States ports had been filled up with vessels carrying Canadian wheat whilst St. John and Halifax had been given the go-by. I will inform my hon. friend that St. John and Halifax have had vessels directed to them which have to be diverted owing to the physical impossibility of loading them at either of those two ports, the harbours of St. John and Halifax being filled up to the brim with transport vessels carrying munitions and

supplies fox Great Britain and her Allies, and the precedence that has been necessary for those transports and the congested condition owing to the number of them have been the reasons why more vessels have not come to those ports.
In regard to the taking out of the commandeered grain, I can say to my hon. friend that at least seven vessels were directed to go to St. John and that three or four of them had to be countermanded simply because they could not be filled at that port owing to the congestion on account of this other traffic which is all necessary. The same is true with regard to Halifax. Several vessels directed to Halifax had to be redirected to Portland in order to be filled. I make that state-jnent just to throw a little light upon the subject. My hon. friend went a little out of his way to have a jab at the Government, which he always 'likes to.


William Pugsley: It is pleasant. I agree with that.


George Eulas Foster: It is food and nourishment to my hon. friend to have a jab at the Government. He says: Has the Canadian Northern railway, which you have h)ad foisted on to you, which you have taken millions of guarantees in, which is your railway, and which is at your beck and call or ought to be, seeing that you have so much money in it, had the audacity xo make an embargo against Canadian ports while it has not done so against United States ports? Why does a railway make an embargo? Because on the front of it between it and the ports to which it is hauling there is so much congested stuff that it does not dare pile in any more; so it says; Until that is cleared out, I cannot haul in any more. But would it be fair or right to the grain men of the Northwest if, because the railway could not haul any more grain to Canadian ports, they 'should also declare that they would not haul it to American ports where it might find an outlet and an opportunity to get to its ultimate market? I just mention that in order to show my hon. friend that there are two sides to the question. As I have squared this matter up, we will leave the rest of the debate until we all go into it at once. Then my hon. friend here, and my hon. friend there, and the rest Of us will have a talk about it, and I think it would be worth while to talk .ahout a thing like that, a real question which has import in it, which has merit in it, Which has necessity in it,

which is one of the perplexing conditions which the whole world is up against-it would be worth while for this committee, at times when it is devoting itself with a great deal of frivolity to things that might well be left unsaid, if it would put on its thinking cap and devote its powers to the solution of that question. The question of transportation is a lovely theme to talk about, but it is the most difficult and perplexing question in the world to-day, and not much less difficult is the question of the Canadian Government making arrangements for transportation from its own ports to other ports, or undertaking the question of shipbuilding in connection with that same lack of facilities at the present time and that same overplus of demand. Those are very important questions and, when we borne to debate that item early next week, I hope that we shall settle down to a fair discussion of them to see if our combined wisdom can find any way out of this perplexing condition.


William Pugsley: I wish I could talk like my hon. friend. I am satisfied, if I could, I could always make an excuse for doing anything. The eloquence of one's talk often makes people forget one's failure to accomplish things. What does the minister say? He says, in beautiful language: Let us get our thinking caps on by and bye; now is not the time, but by and bye let us get our thinking caps on and talk over this important question. If this is an important question, as the minister admits it is, should not the minister lead the way? The Government is in control of this House and of the revenues of this country. This Parliament freely votes to the Government all the money that it wiants. We have already given the Government one-fifth of $250,000,000 to use for war purposes or for purposes which it may deem necessary to advance the interests of this country. We do everything that the Government wants us to do in the way of prosecuting the war successfully, in the way of assisting in upbuilding this country and in the way of improving transportation facilities. Yet, with the attention of- the Government called to the deplorable condition of affairs, a condition which is becoming more deplorable every day, which is becoming dangerous to the Empire and which we ought to confront by doing our part in the assistance of transportation of the food products of Canada'for the people of the Mother Country and in the prosecution of the war, all
the minister can say, after Parliament has been three months in session is: This is a very important question; it is a very difficult question; but we want to get our thinking caps on and we want you gentlemen on the other side of the House to assist us in coming to some conclusion which it would he wise for Canada to come to and which might assist our country and assist the Empire. That is not worthy of this committee; it is not worthy of the people of this country; and I desire to repeat to-day what I said in the opening days of this session, that for its negligence for upvfards of eighteen months since the war broke out, knowing that this .condition of affairs would come about, as the Government must have known, this Government is worthy of the greatest possible blame upon the part of this Parliament land the people of this country, that it has not taken any step of any kind to assist in the transportation of the products of Canada to the Mother Country for the purpose of assisting the Mother Country and the Empire.


George Eulas Foster: My hon. friend does not relish the challenge I threw out that he should get on his thinking cap- not his explosion cap-and when we come to the debate, as we shall, give us his ideas as to practical methods and ways and means by which something may be accomplished. That is what I gave him the invitation for. I wanted him to come down out of the clouds of denunciation of the Government and deploring certain things, and put his very great ability and his very strong mental power into the test to bring out some practical way by which we can help the Mother Country and help ourselves.
. Mr. PUGSLEY: Will the minister promise to- accept my suggestion?


George Eulas Foster: If your suggestion proves to be a good and reasonable and practical one, that is what the Government wants; that is what the Government has long wanted from my hon. friend; but it is what the Government has had very little taste of from him. It consists of denunciation'and of deploring things. What is his practical solution for the transport problem of to-day? I -should like to have his ideas upon it. Will be put on his thinking-cap, -and when we come to this question, as we shall in a few days, will he giv-e us the benefit of his soundest and most practical

judgment as . to how we can bring about these things the lack of which he so much deplores?


William Pugsley: If the minister will take advice from this committee, I am sure he will find a large number of members ready with suggestions; but the minister will not ask for suggestions.


George Eulas Foster: I am doing it
now.


William Pugsley: Then, I am sure they
will be given.


John Howard Sinclair: Would the hon. minister give us an explanation of this item of supervision of subsidized steamship services? The amount is small, but supervision of these services is important. The steamship owners never get tired of taking their money, and I should like the minister to tell us in a word in what the supervision consists.	*


George Eulas Foster: The supervisor is Mr. Tupper, whose salary is $2,500.


John Howard Sinclair: One officer for the whole of Canada?


George Eulas Foster: Yes. From the opening of navigation until its closing, Mt. Tupper actually goes on every one of these steamship services on the eastern coast. He takes a trip on the service itself, stops off at the different ports, and makes his observations, and reports to the department. He is also there to make any special report we may wish him to make. He has not time to make the western coast services. He reports as to the condition of the vessel, the life-saving apparatus, the meals, the sanitary conditions, the loading and unloading facilities-everything in connection with the vessel, and makes his recommendations. We draw these recommendations to the attention of the company concerned. I venture to say that the services now, as compared with five years ago, when Mt. Tupper took over this work, are infinitely better in every respect. I have found the owners of vessels1 quite willing to make the necessary small qhanges to improve the life-saving facilities, the sanitary arrangements, and other matters. That is Mr. Tupper's work and he does it very efficiently.


John Howard Sinclair: This supervising officer does not deal with the profits that the companies make?


George Eulas Foster: The companies give in their accounts of expenses and receipts, and these are looked over by the supervisor. He was in a bank for some four or five years, and has had experience in that kind of work.
At six o'clock the Committee took recess.
The Committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Immigration-relief other than-seed grain to settlers on patented and unpatented lands in the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta-further amount required-Governor General's warrants, $1,550,000.


Mr. ROCHE:: This is not a new vote;
the money has already been expended. The expenditure was authorized by Governor General's warrant, and in order to legalize it we have to have an appropriation of Parliament.


George Perry Graham: What was it for?


William Roche: For relief other than seed grain for the farmers of the West.


George Perry Graham: What kind of relief
was it?


William Roche: [DOT] A number of farmers who were left quite destitute as the result of the total loss of crops had to be provisioned during the winter months and well on to the summer, until the time came when the crops were so far advanced that the credit of the farmers was re-established. We had to supply them with provisions and with the general necessities of life, some with fuel, some with clothing. In the southern parts of Alberta and Saskatchewan especially, the farmers were left in very destitute circumstances, and in the emergency, that faced us we had to raise this money under Governor General's warrant.


George Perry Graham: The money is an advance, is it not?


William Roche: Yes, we have a lien on
the lands of the farmers to whom assistance was given.


George Perry Graham: How much was spent
last year, including seed grain and everything?
Mir. ROCHE': For seed grain and relief, $13,362,958. That includes everything- seed grain, relief other than seed grain, fodder.


George Perry Graham: Do the provincial Governments come in on this?


William Roche: In 1908 an arrangement was made whereby we lent the money to the Provincial Government, for which they paid us 5 per cent. They advanced the money to the farmers, collected from them and returned it to us as it was collected. This proposition, however, was so large that the Provincial Governments would not have anything to do with it. In the drought-stricken area they did extend relief in the form, of money for road-making. I understand that the Government of Saskatchewan expended in this connection an amount in the neighbourhood of a million and a quarter, but they did not grant relief in the form of seed grain.


George Perry Graham: Liens were taken on the land; have any of the moneys been repaid?


William Roche: Some little time ago, somewhere in the neighbourhood of a million and a quarter dollars were returned.
Immigration-relief other than seed grain to settlers on patented and unpatented lands in the provinces of Manitoba and British Columbia, $90,000.


William Roche: This stands in much the
same position as the other, except that the expenditure was not arranged by Governor General's warrant. We had to grant some relief to the provinces of Manitoba and British Columbia, and as we had no appropriation for these provinces the amount was paid out of the appropriation that had been voted for Saskatchewan and Alberta. On the advice of the Finance Department arid the Auditor General, we are now voting it.


George Perry Graham: I understand that the
amounts taken for Manitoba and British Columbia, for which there was no vote, came out of the grant to Saskatchewan and Alberta?


William Roche: Yes.


George Perry Graham: This is to readjust the account and have it stand against Manitoba and British Columbia in the regular way?


William Roche: Yes.
Immigration - amounts required for seed grain to settlers on patented and unpatented lands in the provinces of Manitoba and British Columbia, $48,000.


William Pugsley: There used to be a well understood rule in the Government that money could not be used for any purpose except that for which it was voted. Has that rule been done away with, and if so, how? This Parliament voted money for
seed grain to settlers in Saskatchewan and Alberta, and apparently without any authority of Parliament part of that money has been diverted to another province. The minister might just as well have taken it out of some of the millions that were voted for public works which were not proceeded with. If he wanted to get this money he should have got it by Governc r General's warrant as for an unforeseen expenditure. I do not know how in the world the Finance Minister could authorize this misappropriation-because that is what it is-of moneys voted by Parliament. A few years ago, such a thing would have been absolutely impossible; it would not have been tolerated by the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Justice, or the Auditor General.


William Roche: I understand that the
Auditor General was consulted in the matter, and he was quite agreeable so long as it was legalized in this manner. Certain amounts are paid to needy settlers out of our immigration vote every year. This appropriation was to have been legalized on the last day of the last session, but through an oversight it was neglected. The Auditor General and the Finance Department were consulted with regard to this. It was a case of either amending the Act to make it applicable to Manitoba and British Columbia or putting these items in the Estimates, and our advice 'from the Finance Department was that it would he preferable to do it this way.


William Pugsley: That means, then, that moneys voted for one purpose can be applied illegally to another purpose upon the understanding that Parliament will pass an Act legalizing what has been done. The Government has no rigfht to assume that Parliament will legalize whatever it does. The ministry should not continually treat members of Parliament as mere automatons who should register whatever the Government may decide upon. It seems to me that the statement of the minister does not improve matters. I do not object to giving this amendment to the settlers in these provinces, but as the expenditure was unforeseen and was not provided for by legislation, the Government should have obtained a Governor General's warrant and afterwards should have asked Parliament to vote the amount. The minister is not unfamiliar with Governor General's Warrants, because we find on page 5 an item for the repurchase of some water-power on

the Winnipeg river. In. 1915, while the war was on, a Governor General's warrant was obtained in this connection for $100,000. The minister could not -have been unfamiliar with the fact that a Governor General's warrant might be applied for to cover cases for which there was no appropriation. I cannot for the moment think that the Government were right in taking the money, which was voted for one purpose, and applying it to another purpose.


William Roche: It was the same purpose, only in another province.


George Perry Graham: It was voted to lohn Smith and given to William Brown.


William Pugsley: In the same way if the money had been voted for a wharf in Quebec and not used it might be applied to a wharf in Ontario.


William Roche: That is a technical objection.


John Gillanders Turriff: In what amounts was the relief provided for given to individuals?


William Roche: For seed grain there was a maximum of 400 bushels. The relief varied from $1 up to the necessities of the case.


John Gillanders Turriff: The reason I am asking is that I have heard many complaints during the past year about the amounts of seed grain that were given to farmers having only a quarter section of land to seed. I saw lists showing that farmers with only one quarter section each received from $400 to $500 for seed grain. Of course it may have included fodder for teams to put in the seed. All that money comes as a prior claim to any liens that may be against the land, and I heard some criticism as to the course of the department in granting such large sums in relief under these circumstances.


William Roche: It may be that the hon. gentleman has been misinformed as to the amount given for seed grain; some of it may have been for relief and some for fodder, because we had to supply many farmers with seed for stock in order to keep their working horses in condition to put the seed in. The maximum amount given to any farmer was 400 bushels, covering all kinds of seed; 2 bushels of wheat to the acre, 3 bushels of oats, and 2i bushels of barley. So that if there were $400 or $500 against a quarter section that might include seed grain, and fodder, and relief as well.


John Gillanders Turriff: What was represented
to me was that, if $500 or $600 Or $700 had
IMr. Pugsley.}
been advanced by a loan company or any one else, to a farmer with a farm of only moderate quality, of which there would not be 160 acres of land that could be cultivated, the lender found his security to be only a second mortgage, with a first mortgage ahead of it almost as large as the amount he had originally considered it proper to advance on the farmer's property.


Mr ROCHE:: The only explanation I can give as to there being $400 or $500 against a quarter section is that I have given. As to our lien on the property having priority, of course that was the condition under which Parliament voted the money, and the Provincial Governments gave us the same security that they had taken under the Provincial Acts of 1908. The loan companies have been protesting at our liens taking priority over their mortgages. That, of course, would not apply to the money advanced by way of relief.


John Gillanders Turriff: I do not think there was any particular objection on the part of the loan companies to a legitimate advance for seed taking priority.


William Roche: They objected strongly.


John Gillanders Turriff: I was not aware of that. I know that in some cases they have expressed the opinion that the seed grain part was all right, as long as it -was legitimately for that purpose; but in many eases settlers obtained grain and did not use it for seed grain but sold it, the value of the grain in these cases ranking as a first mortgage, to the detriment of the holder of the original mortgage.


Mr BUCHANAN:: Could the minister tell us the average amount advanced to farmers in the drought-affected areas last year?


William Roche: I do not know that we
have struck an average.


Mr. BUCHANAN:: I have a ease before me of a man receiving about $1,300 as advances for seed grain and relief, and all he had in crop last year was 100 acres. The complaint here is that this man was given far too much assistance by the Government; in fact it is charged that he was given partial treatment by the distributor of relief.


William Roche: It is difficult to state the
average in any particular district. We know how many applications for relief were granted, and we know the total amount granted; but we have not the particulars

for any one district. There may have been cases where apparently abnormal quantities of grain were advanced, and of course there must always be some complaints in regard to individual cases.


John Gillanders Turriff: Does the minister think that the relief granted in the case which my hon. friend from Lethbridge has brought up was fair? Suppose the man had put the hundred acres into wheat, there would have been 150 bushels of seed; and if into oats, 300 bushels. At the most, the product would have amounted to between $200 and $300, so that the man must have got $1,000. If the land is mortgaged, it would mean that practically the mortgage would not be worth the paper it is written on.


William Roche: In the first place, I would like to be sure of the facts. I would ask my hon. friend if he is sure of the facts?


John Gillanders Turriff: I am taking the statement made by my hon. friend from Lethbridge, (Mir. Buchanan).


William Roche: It is rather a special case. We do not know whether there was any mortgage or not. Does my hon. friend know?


John Gillanders Turriff: I do not know.


William Roche: I would like to know the facts before making a pronouncement upon the case. There have been so many rumours in connection with the distribution of seed grain that proved foundationless when looked into, that I would like to have the facts. It has been represented to me, for instance, that a certain Liberal member of the Saskatchewan Legislature got several hundred dollars in relief, notwithstanding the fact that he was getting his sessional indemnity. Now there is nothing in that-


John Gillanders Turriff: It may be true.


William Roche: I doubt it. A great many other rumours have been current, and as my hon. friend knows, rumours grow, as they travel. But we have not had a case so glaring as the hon. member for Lethbridge has stated.


William Ashbury Buchanan: 
William Roche: Considering the very large distribution of seed grain, there were hound to be some complaints, but, taking into consideration the fact that $13,000,000 was expended, they have been comparatively few. No doubt there will be some complaints of partiality having been shown,

but the 'basis on which relief was granted was this: In the first place, the man had to fill out .a form showing the number of acres which he had ready for crop, and then we gave a maximum of $400 worth of grain which I do not think was exceeded in any case. At any rate, no such case has been brought to the attention of the department. Is the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Buchanan) quite sure that the amount he has mentioned did not include some indebtedness for seed grain advanced, say, in 1908.


William Ashbury Buchanan: I cannot say as to that.


William Roche: There might be many
things in connection with a case 'like this that we do not know of. It might include assistance given several years in succession.


William Ashbury Buchanan: The letter would lead me to conclude that it was for 1914.


John Gillanders Turriff: I do not think that in that part of the country they got any seed grain before last year.


William Roche: I am informed that there has not been a year during which some distribution of seed grain, did not take place in Alberta.


John Gillanders Turriff: We are arguing very
much in the dark, and as this seems to be a very bad case, whether of favoritism or worse, perhaps my hon. friend the minister would take the letter read by my hon. friend from Lethbridge, find out the facts, and bring them to the attention of the House.


William Roche: Certainly, and I will inquire into any other case that may be brought to my attention,
Dominion Lands and Parks-to provide for the repurchase of the property contiguous to Silver Falls on the Winnipeg river, Manitoba, which dominated a power site of 60,000 horsepower capacity, including Governor General's warrant for $100,188.51, $102,824.51.


George Perry Graham: This seems to 'be a case of Silver Falls in reality. Would the minister explain the particular reference to the necessity for getting- a Governor General's warrant?


William Roche: I have had a memorandum prepared by the Water-Powers Branch of the department, which reads:
In the years 1903 and 1904 there was a great deal of activity among parties interested in the development of power along the Winnipeg river for the purpose of supplying the growing market of Winnipeg and district with heat, light and power. Many applications were re-
[Mr. Roche. I
ceived in the Interior Department for waterpower concessions. At that time the value of water-powers and the necessity of their proper regulation and control was not realized and there was no definite policy of water-power1 administration in force. It was the habit of the department to sell lands valuable for waterpower purposes. As there were many applicants to purchase those properties, an auction sale was arranged, lands to be sold on the ten yearly payment plan with interest.
This sale resulted in the purchase of the property in question by the late J. S. Cummins, of Chicago, a partner in the engineering and contracting firm of H. M. Byllesby and Company. The initial payment was made and annual payments continued from time to time. Shortly after the sale was made, the tremendous importance of water-powers was realized, and the department endeavoured to inaugurate an adequate water-power administration. The whole subject was investigated and resulted in the year 1908 in the passing of suitable regulations governing the mode of granting water-power concessions. These regulations provided in short for limited concessions in the form of leases and licenses for twenty-one years, renewable for three further periods, the charging of rental, the control of rates, etc.
The foundation of this method of water-power administration was the retaining by the Crown of its interests in water-powers. This policy could not be carried out if title in fee simple were granted to lands dominating undeveloped water-power sites. It was therefore early realized that the completion of the sale of the lands to Mr. Cummins would controvert the spirit of the water-power regulations. Subsequent surveys and investigations of the water-powers of the Winnipeg river carried on by the department showed that Silver Falls site, which the lands in question dominated, shquld not be developed as a distinct power project, but that these falls should be combined with other falls on the river to make a much larger development, and of course a cheaper development per capital cost, per h.p. Therefore, it was not only necessary from a proper view of administration of water-powers, but also of the best conservation of the natural resources of the river that the department should regain its control over the Silver Falls power site.
The Superintendent of the Dominion WaterPower Branch was authorized to negotiate with Mr. H. M. Byllesby, of Chicago, with a view to the department securing a relinquishment from him of his interest in these properties w1-the negotiations opened there was one payment, the final one, to be made, and a sum approximating $95,842 had already been paid in to the department. An understanding was finally arrived at with Mr. Byllesby, which contemplated his relinquishment of his interest in these properties upon the department refunding to him all moneys paid into the department, and without interest thereon. The essential consideration in this understanding was that a refund should be made immediately. It was therefore necessary to secure the necessary funds by Governor's warrant.
In conclusion it should be pointed out that the department has secured a most satisfactory arrangement in being able to regain its interest in this exceedingly important power site simoly by refunding the actual amounts paid in to the department on the purchase price. It would probably have been reasonable for Mr. Byllesby

to have exacted a considerable sum to cover the value of the water-power site itself. There is no doubt that the financial situation due to present conditions had a great deal to do with the satisfactory nature of the arrangement.
1 Hon. gentlemen will remember that the amendments made to the Dominion Lands Act a few sessions ago provided that in future lands adjacent to water-powers should not be disposed of by sale. As that had been done in this case, negotiations were opened with Bylleshy, who had only one more payment to make, and he relinquished his interest in this property upon the department refunding, without interest, all the money he had paid down.


William Pugsley: When were these negotiations entered into and when concluded?


William Roche: They were begun some time in July of last year, I believe. I am not sure when they were concluded.


William Pugsley: Such an important principle is involved in this matter that I think the minister ought to bring down all the papers before he asks the committee to pass this amount. As the minister is aware, Governor General's warrants can be issued only for the purpose of repairing or rebuilding some public work which has been destroyed by fire or some other calamity, or for the purpose of meeting some expenditure of an urgent character which could not be foreseen. The words of the statute are very clear. Section 42 of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, paragraph (b), says:
If, when Parliament is not in session, any accident happens te any public work or building which requires an immediate outlay for the repair thereof, or any other occasion arises | when any expenditure, not foreseen or provided ' for by Parliament, is urgently and immediately j required for the public good, then upon the re-1 port of the Minister of Finance, etc., etc.
I think we should certainly have a report from the Minister of Finance, and also the papers relating to the negotiations. I think it is important to know when these negotiations began. It certainly does seem to me to be an extraordinary thing that circumstances were such that during recess the Government should have found it necessary to resort to the expedient of obtaining a Governor General's warrant-an expedient which ought to be resorted to only in the rarest possible cases. I think the minister will agree that the papers in this matter ought to be brought down. If these negotiations were carried on in earnest, prior to the last session of Parliament, the Govern-
180 [DOT]
ment ought to have asked Parliament to make provision for the expenditure involved. These negotiations would not be completed in a week, or a day, or a month, or even six months. I understand that the legislation to which the minister has referred, changing the policy with regard to the distribution >
of water-powers, was passed some years ago. That is not recent legislation. If the Government contemplated regaining possession of the water-powers which had been disposed of previously, and Parliament had thought there would be any advantage in empowering the Government to do so, it would have made the necessary appropriation. But for the Government to take into its hands this extraordinary and rarely used power, a power which ought to be most sparingly used, of issuing a Governor General's warrant, was a step which requires the very fullest explanation. I do not believe that you could get my hon. friend the Minister of Justice to report that this was a case for a Governor General's warrant, and if the matter had been fully explained to His Royal Highness, upon whom the responsibility rests, I doubt whether he would have felt justified in authorizing a warrant for this purpose. This item, I think, should not be passed until all the papers and correspondence in connection with the negotiations have been brought down, including the documents showing the necessity for obtaining this water-power.


William Roche: I hope the hon. member will not insist on having the item stand. I will bring down the papers asked for, but as he is aware, this money has already been paid out by Governor General's warrant, and Parliament must make the necessary appropriation. I am informed that negotiations were begun last July, and brought to a close a couple of months later, or at all events not later than October. I was in western iCanada myself when the Governor General's warrant was issued, and J think Hon. Mr. Burrell was acting minister at the time. The matter was brought before Council, and a Governor General's warrant issued after a full explanation to my colleagues. One reason why this action was taken was, as I explained, that there was one final payment to make, which was to be paid about the first of November. Of course, once that payment was received by the department, patent should issue to the gentleman who had purchased those lands from the Government originally, and I have read the



memorandum to show how essential the securing of the land is, 'because it dominates the whole site on the Winnipeg river at that point. I know that the Dominion Water Powers Branch consulted with Judge Robson, Public Utilities Commissioner, of the city of Winnipeg, and Judge Robson was very anxious for this action to be taken by the Government. He was thoroughly conversant with water power conditions on the Winnipeg river, and he thought it too bad to have this land alienated, especially in view of the present arrangements. The money has been paid on a Governor General's warrant, and this item is put in, in accordance with the statute, to legalize the payment. I will bring down all the papers and I would like my hon. friend not to [DOT] delay the passage of this item, because I desire to leave the city myself to-morrow.


William Pugsley: I thank the hon. minister for his explanation. He is always very courteous and very considerate, and he always desires to give all the information asked for. Under the circumstances' I will not delay the passage of the item if the minister will undertake to have the papers laid upon the table as soon as they are ready. I suppose that will be done in the course of a few days.


William Roche: Yes.


John Gillanders Turriff: The minister and his officer who negotiated the arrangement are both to be congratulated. In, my judgment it was a very good bargain to get the property back by just returning the money that had been paid in for it. In that respect I am pleased to congratulate the minister on the bargain.
Indians-British Columbia-to encourage Indians in farming and fruit culture
further amount required	$4,000
Relief to destitute Indians-further	.
amount required	  8,000
Office, miscellaneous and unforeseen-*
further amount required	 6,000


William Pugsley: The minister should explain the increase in the estimates for the British Columbia Indians. Why should there be necessity for spending more money than was estimated? I would almost think that there would be no justification for exceeding the amount estimated, particularly during the war when one would suppose there would be eveTy disposition to economize. In looking through the Estimates, I find no evidence of any substan-
tial reduction, whilst here and there I find increases, just as if everything was prosperous and the money could be used for all those purposes without detriment to the public interest.


William Roche: The hon. gentleman is
astray in stating that there has been, no material reduction in the Estimates, because there has been a reduction of over $300,000 in the Estimates for Indians this year. This, of course, is a supplementary vote for the year ended March 31, 1916. The explanation of the $4,000 item to provide a further amount to encourage Indians in farming and fruit culture, is this:	The
Main Estimates for 1915-16 for this service was $4,950; but, as the department desired to increase production as much as possible, larger advances of seed were made than were contemplated. Undoubtedly some of these advances will be repaid by the Indians. The explanation of the item of $8,000 to provide a further amount for relief for destitute Indians is this: The estimated expenditure for this service for the fiscal year 1915-16 was $22,000, but this is proving inadecuate as the expenditure during the first eight months of the fiscal year has been, in so far as accounts have come to hand and been paid, $24,000, and as the remaining months of the fiscal year are the most trying amongst the Indians, the department will be called upon to meet considerable expenditure yet. Assistance is only rendered those who are really destitute and unable to provide for themselves. There has been impressed upon all Indian agents the necessity of keeping this expenditure as low as possible without creating any want and suffering, and it is impossible for the departmeent to withhold aid from those who are in need, hence the necessity for this supplementary vote.


William Pugsley: You have quite an increase in office expenses.


William Roche: The estimated expenditure for this service, which covers travelling expenses of all inspectors, Indian agents, and constables in British Columbia, was placed at $20,000 for the fiscal year 1915-16, but it is proving inadequate and it becomes necessary to ask for a supplementary vote. The expenditure for the preceding fiscal year was $26,000, and up to the 31st of January last, in so far as accounts have been received and paid, the expenditure has been $19,000, so that it will be readily seen that the vote will be dnsuf-

fieient to pay all accounts up to the 31st of 'March, 1916. It was hoped that the amount placed in the estimates would suffice, but owing to the activities of officials it is proving to be insufficient. Many of the officials have numerous, lengthy, and expensive trips to make, visiting the reserves under their charge. Considerable extra expenditure has also had to be incurred by agents and inspectors owing to having to accompany the Land Commission when visiting the reserves.. There are four inspectors, fifteen Indian agents, and fourteen constables whose expenses are to be paid out of this appropriation, being on an average of about $800 each.


William Ashbury Buchanan: On March 23, the minister answered a question I asked in regard to the Indian Land Commission in British Columbia. I would like the minister to tell me when this commission was appointed, how long it has been in existence, and if it is still at work.


William Roche: The hon. gentleman was not here the other evening when we had a discussion on the British Columbia Royal Commission and when the information was all given. It was appointed in the spring of 1913, and it will wind up its labours by the 15th day of May.


William Ashbury Buchanan: 
William Roche: I think we can much more conveniently discuss the value of this work after we have received the final report of the commissioners. It is expected that they will report about the 15th of May. The hon. gentleman will remember that the arrangement entered into was that the province of British Columbia should bear one-half of the expense of the commission and the Dominion the other half. The commission entered upon their duties in the spring of 1913. I think these gentlemen have been doing excellent work. It has taken them a very long time, of course. There are eleven or twelve hundred Indian reserves in British Columbia, and each of these had to be visited and the evidence of the Indians taken. The commissioners had to endure a good many hardships in making these trips. The vexed question of Indian lands has been agitating the people of British Columbia for many years, and no proper title to these lands could be given by the Dominion Government because of the reversionary interest claimed by British Columbia. So it was deemed necessary and expedient to have this commission go into the whole question. It was arranged that where reserves were found, upon investigation, to be larger than was necessary for the band, they were to be cut down, but only with the sanction of the Indians; and where reserves were considered to be too small, the British Columbia Government promised to add to them out of other provincial lands. I think this investigation will have the result of putting an end to many longstanding and vexed questions. As to its full value, we shall know better after we have had the final report.


William Ashbury Buchanan: Is Mr. McKenna drawing a salary from the Government in any other .capacity than as a member of this commission?


William Roche: No, not while he is engaged in this work.	*


John Gillanders Turriff: Has his engagement in this work claimed his whole time since his appointment?	,


William Roche: Yes.
Public Works-Chargeable to Income-public buildings, Alberta - Calgary - accommodation for Assistant Receiver General, $25,000.


John Gillanders Turriff: Is that a new 'building?


Mr. ROGERS:: That vote has been in the Estimates for .some time. Alberta and Saskatchewan were the only two provinces in Canada that had not proper quarters for the Receiver General's, Department. A couple of years ago sites were acquired both in Regina and in, Calgary
9 .p.m. for these buildings, but the work was not gone on with, and will not be entered upon at present.


John Gillanders Turriff: What staff does the Receiver General have at these places?


Robert Rogers: It is not so- much to provide accommodation for the staff as to provide proper vaults.
Mr, TURRIFF: Are any of these buildings in Calgary for which items appear in the Estimates under construction?


Robert Rogers: The Calgary drill hall is not under construction, but, as stated last night, it will be gone on with because there is great necessity for it. They have a large nmuber of troops and have no proper accommodation. They have been pressing for this for some time. That will be gone on with in the spring, but that is the only one.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The vote here is $99,000. Will that finish the building?


Robert Rogers: No. This is the first estimate; another estimate is being made by the architect, and an item will appear in the Supplementary Estimates. Tenders were called for about the time the war broke out. The city was going to give the site, but there was difficulty about it. However, that has been adjusted.
Alberta-Dominion public buildings-improvements, repairs, etc., $15,000.


William Ashbury Buchanan: I suppose that will include the clock in the new post office at Lethbridge; we are very anxious to have that clock.


Robert Rogers: This amount is required
for very urgent work in connection with renewal and improvement and repairs, not covered by any special or general appropriation made by Parliament, that may have to be undertaken during the fiscal year ending March 31, 1917, in connection with Dominion public buildings in the

province of Alberta under the control of the Federal Government, in order to keep these buildings in a proper state of efficiency.
Bassano-public building, $10,000.


Robert Rogers: This amount is required
to complete the construction of the building and to provide fittings, furniture, lockboxes, sidewalks and fencing. The building is 54 by 40 feet, two stories and basement, brick and stone. It is required for post office purposes.


William Ashbury Buchanan: Is the building occupied by the post office?


Robert Rogers: Not yet.


William Ashbury Buchanan: It will be this year?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Edmonton post office-addition, $100,000.


Mr. OLIVER:: Is that to be gone on with?


Robert Rogers: No. It is in the class of buildings that we are not going on with this year. There is in Edmonton a very good post office building, but some time ago it was suggested that as the accommodation was not sufficient an addition should be provided. It is like many other buildings that we are not going on with; in the meantime we hope to be able to get on without suffering too much inconvenience.


Frank Oliver: Has the property necessary for an enlargement of the post office been acquired?


Robert Rogers: Under an Order in Council dated March 14, 1905, the Minister of Public Works was authorized to purchase for the sum of $20,000 a property situated at the south east corner of MacDougall and Rice Streets, having a frontage of 90 feet on MacDougall street and a depth of 150 feet on Rice street, for the erection thereon of a public building for post office purposes. Apparently this Order in Council has not yet been acted upon. My hon. hon. friend would know better than I do whether or not that is a proper location.


Frank Oliver: The property that my
hon. friend has just mentioned is the property that is occupied by the present building. If there was to be an enlargement of the building, it would be necessary to purchase other property; what I want to know is whether property has been purchased for that purpose.


Robert Rogers: No; it has not been purchased as yet.

Edmonton-customs examining warehouse, $75,000.


Frank Oliver: What is the position with regard to that?


Robert Rogers: We have simply purchased the site; nothing else has been done.


Frank Oliver: Where is the site?


Robert Rogers: On the corner of Third
street and Peace avenue.


Frank Oliver: Has the property been
purchased?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Frank Oliver: This sum is not needed
to cover the purchase price of the property?


Robert Rogers: No.


Frank Oliver: It is intended to go on
with this?


Robert Rogers: No.
E'monton-new drill hall, $30,000.


Frank Oliver: What is the information
with regard to this drill hall?


Robert Rogers: This completes the drill hall-sidewalks, fencing and everything around the place.


Frank Oliver: What will the total cost
be?


Robert Rogers: $350,000.
Grand Prairie-immigration hall, $3,000.


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


Robert Rogers: It is like some of the others; it is to stand in the meantime.


Frank Oliver: I do not know that the
Government would have been particularly well advised in making this expenditure before, but now' that the railroad has been completed to Grand Prairie city that place has necessarily become an important point for the landing of immigrants. I would think that an immigration hall there would be a great necessity. As the amount involved is not large, I would strongly urge that it be spent and that the building be erected without delay. I do not think that any other place in the West would have the same present and passing necessity for such a building.


Robert Rogers: We have a building
rented there; although it may not be very suitable, still we have the accommodation. The Interior Department have been pressing
us to go on with this building and they have been pressing for accommodation at Peace River as well. I will take both cases up with the Minister of the Interior, and if they cannot get on with the accommodation that they already have I shall be pleased to give the matter consideration with a view to trying to meet the necessity, recognizing as I do that in view of the construction of railways there a large number of settlers are going in and additional accommodation is undoubtedly necessary.


Frank Oliver: The conditions at Peace River 'Grossing or Peace River Town are similar to those at Grand Prairie. The railroad was practically completed to that point last fall, and it is probably the most important distributing point in the Peace River district. It commands the navigation of the river for a stretch of approximately 500 miles, 200 miles up and 300 miles down, and besides that it is the marketing point for a moderately well settled piece of country, about 60 miles in length, lying on the north side of the Peace river, so that there is really very great necessity for accommodation for settlers at tha/t point, .as well as at Grand Prairie. I do not think there is any accommodation there ait the present time. Of course I have not seen any item in the Estimates but I should like to second the recommendation of the Minister of 'the Interior as to the desirability of moderate accommodation for immigrants at that point. I do not think that the present accommodation at Grand Prairie is at all adequate to the new conditions. It was probably quite suitable for the former conditions, but now that the railroad is completed to that point, I think it would be entirely inadequate, and the minister and the Government would be doing themselves a great deal of credit if they established the accommodation proposed under this item.
There is still another point to which I wish to draw the attention of the minister, and that is Spirit river. The Spirit river prairie is 50 miles distant from Grand Prairie. The railroad runs westerly to Spirit river; then turns sharply south to Grand Prairie. Continuing westerly from Spirit river is, of course, a country available for settlement, and certainly immigration accommodation at Grand Prairie would not be of any value for the Spirit river prairie. Between the two prairies lies a broken country called Saddle mountain, which separates them so that the accommo-

dation at one place is not of any value for the other. It is not as though they were both in the one: prairie area, because they .are not. I would respectfully bring to the attention olf the minister the advisability of making the expenditure at Grand Prairie, as well as making provision for immigration accommodation at Peace River Crossing and also at Spirit river.


Robert Rogers: If we cannot get suitable accommodation by renting accommodation at Grand Prairie, we will place a small amount in the Supplementary Estimates with the view of meeting the necessity of the Peace river country. In so far as Spirit river is concerned, we have so far had no request from the Department of the Interior, and of course my hon. friend knows that I only undertake the construction of public buildings when I am pressed by one of the other departments to do so. It is probable that we will be able to rent a suitable building at that point. I quite agree that there is a pressing necessity for moderate and modest accommodation both at Grand Prairie and at Peace river.


Frank Oliver: The railroad reached
Spirit river only in February, so that I think the condition is absolutely new there, almost as new as it is at Grand Prairie and at Peace River Crossing.


Robert Rogers: It has not the river connection like the other.


Frank Oliver: No. It is about 15 miles south of the Peace river. The Spirit river prairie area is not as large as the Grand Prairie, but it is an important- area and the country to the west is vacant and no doubt will be attractive to settlers, and there is no doubt at all that there will be a demand for accommodation at that point.
High River-public building, $20,000.


William Ashbury Buchanan: Is it the intention to do anything towards the construction of these buildings at High River and Macleod? I presume they are to be post offices.


Robert Rogers: No, nothing will be done.


William Ashbury Buchanan: What about the immigration building at Medicine Hat?


Robert Rogers: That will have to stand.


William Ashbury Buchanan: Until after the war.
What is going to be done with the old public building in Lethbridge? Practically all the Government offices have been transferred to the new building there.


Robert Rogers: My hon. friend knows that it was used as a land office, but now that we have got into -our new building it is not being used. It was not considered an opportune time to attempt to dispose of it in any way, and so it is simply standing there in the meantime.
Vegreville-public building, $25,000.


Frank Oliver: With reference to these three buildings at Vegreville, Vermilion, and Wainwright, will anything be done?


Robert Rogers: They stand.


Frank Oliver: There is no prospect of
any construction?
New Westminster-public building-fittings, etc., $6,000.


Frank Oliver: Will that complete the fittings?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
North Vancouver-drill hall, $3,000.


Frank Oliver: Will that complete the hall ?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Frank Oliver: What will be the total cost?


Robert Rogers: 

Prince Rupert-drill ball, $7,300.


Frank Oliver: Why is there a difference of $100, compared with last year?


Robert Rogers: The statement I have here shows that $109 has been spent, hut it does not give details.


Frank Oliver: What is the estimated total cost?


Robert Rogers: We have no estimate made; $8,000 was put in for the site, and there has been no estimate on the building.
Vancouver-new detention building, $55,000.


Frank Oliver: Will that complete the work?


Robert Rogers: Yes, that will finish the building and the wharf in front.


Frank Oliver: What will be the total
cost?


Robert Rogers: 

Victoria-new drill hall, $40,000.


Frank Oliver: Will that complete the work?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Frank Oliver: What is the total cost?


Robert Rogers: 

Victoria-Saanich observatory, $75,000.


Frank Oliver: Will that complete the work?	.


Robert Rogers: No, we have yet to ibuild some houses for the observers; this vote will only complete the main observatory.


Frank Oliver: What will be the total cost of the main observatory?


Robert Rogers: 


Frank Oliver: We are voting $75,000.


Robert Rogers: That building has been finished; this is for the residences of the observers.


Frank Oliver: There are still others to be built?


Robert Rogers: There are others to follow; the office building and two residences.


Frank Oliver: Does this include anything but the buildings; has it anything to do with the appliances within the building?


Robert Rogers: This vote of $75,000 is to be applied to the erection of buildings, etc., in connection with Saanich observatory, British Columbia. The probable requirements for 1916-17 are: Amount due on contract for dome, $15,000; building for dome, $5,000; observer's residence, $1,000; contingencies, $2,000; office building, $40,000; residence for director, $12,000.


Frank Oliver: And still there is more to come?


Robert Rogers: We will have to build more residences. This vote will do for the present, but they have been pressing for residences.


Frank Oliver: We had some discussion with regard to this observatory when the Estimates of the Interior Department were up, and the Minister of the Interior gave the committee to understand that there would be a very limited staff at this observatory. Apparently the limited staff require unlimited accommodation. I hope the results of their scientific research will be equal to the cost.


Robert Rogers: I think my hon. friend has misunderstood me. There is $1,000 for the observer's residence, and $12,000 for the residence of the director. These are the only amounts which it is proposed to spend on residences.


Frank Oliver: I understood that there were still other residences to be built.


Robert Rogers: As we have observers, we will have to put up residences.
Experimental farms-new buildings and improvements, renewals and repairs, etc., in connection with existing buildings, fences, etc., $150,000.


Robert Rogers: This is a general vote for improvements, etc., in connection with the farms.


Frank Oliver: This seems to be a large order. What was the expenditure last year for the same purpose?


Robert Rogers: 


John Gillanders Turriff: Is this not a vote which my hon. friend could reduce in times like these?,, I think the old buildings ought to do until the war is over.


Robert Rogers: Last year we spent on the barn at Ottawa, the old barn having been burned down, $50,000. The rest of the vote is made up of small items: Kentville, N.S., $1,200; Brandon, Man., $2,300; Indian Head, Saskatchewan, $5,230; Rosthern, Sask., $1,000; Scott, Sask., $700; Lethbridge, Alta., $3,350; Lacombe, Alta., $4,025; Inver-mere, B.C., $1,200; Summerland, B.O., $300; Sidney, B.C., $2,231; Agassiz, B.C., $5,725; Cap Rouge, Que., $4,450; Charlottetown, P.E.I., $1,975; Nappan, N.S., $4,500; Fredericton, N.B., $4,255; Ste. Anne de la Pocatiere, $6,879; Lennoxville, $1,580, making a total of $101,648.31.


William Pugsley: I should like to call attention to the fact that for the year ended March 31, 1915, Public Works Department has expended upon the experimental farm at Fredericton, $10,701.56. In addition to that $10,000 odd, there has also been expended upon the farm during the same year upwards of $40,000. So in one year there has been expended uipon a comparatively small farm upwards of $50,000. It is an upland farm and cannot be over 200 acres in extent, I should think, and to spend $50,000 in one year on tiling, building, ploughing, stumping, etc., strikes me as an enormous expenditure. Can the minister explain why, in addition to the $43,000 that was expended on the farm by the Department of Agriculture, he thought it necessary to expend $10,000 more, making for the year a total expenditure of upwards of $50,000?


Robert Rogers: Of course my hon. friend understands that I have nothing to do

with, the stumping that takes place on the farm. It was found necessary last year to build a superintendent's house, a piggery, and an implement shed; these account for the $10,000.	.


William Pugsley: How much did the piggery cost?


Robert Rogers: $5,000.


Frank Oliver: How many pigs are kept there?


Robert Rogers: The Acting Minister of
Agriculture will be here to-morrow, and will be able to tell my hon. friend that.


John Gillanders Turriff: It is just in matters
of this kind that we should economize. The wisdom of spending $5,000 on a piggery might be questioned even in ordinary times, but particularly in war times. If the idea of an experimental farm is to set an example to farmers around, how many farmers does the minister expect will be able to afford $5,000 on a piggery? This item seems to me an unnecessary expense in these times, and also the item we were discussing a moment ago, of $150,000 for new buildings and repairs. The experimental farm ought to be able to do as well as the ordinary farmer, especially in a time like this. I think the minister could well afford to cut this $150,000 item in two.


Robert Rogers: There is some reason in what my hon. friend says. This has been a sort of joint work between the two departments, but last' year we came to an understanding, and I do not think my hon. friend will have anything to complain about in future.


William Pugsley: How is it the Public
Works Department is buying stumping powder for this farm at Fredericton? I see the Agricultural Department spent $700 for that purpose last year. There was no election on down there; so how comes it the minister was spending money on stumping?


Robert Rogers: They were probably
stumping for the location of the building. I would point out that there are two kinds of stumping: the kind that is done in New Brunswick, and the kind that is carried on in western Canada.


William Pugsley: This is stumping powder. Does it not strike my hon. friend that as the Minister of Agriculture had spent $700 on stumping powder, this farm could have got along very well without the Minister of

Public Works spending $10 more. While $10 is not a large item, $700 is a large amount to spend on stumping powder.


Robert Rogers: I do not wish to dispute the statement of my hon. friend, but I think he will find that that $10 item is under the Department of Agriculture.


William Pugsley: No, it is under Public
Works according to the Auditor General's Report. I should not expect to find such a small item as $10 for stumping powder among the expenditures of the Agricultural Department. They buy it in $700 worths.
Mr. ROGER'S: Perhaps it was spent on stumping the piggery site.


William Pugsley: That is a new theory to put forward. It seems to me absurd to spend $50,000 on that farm when the war is on, and I was very much struck when I saw the item ini the Auditor General's Report under the Department of Agriculture. It shows, as so many other things show, that the ministers, except on rare occasions, do not realize that a war is on, or that there is any difficulty in raising money; they go right along just as if these were peaceful times, and there was no demand for interest upon the war loan, as if we had millions and millions to spend, just as the fancy strikes us. Does not the minister think that $53,000 is an extraordinary amount to spend on this .farm while the war is on? But the minister will not look into it; my words will fall upon deaf ears. Unfortunately the Minister of Agriculture is ill, but some other minister ought to give an. explanation of this item. My hon. friend from Edmonton suggests that as stumping powder was bought, perhaps the Minister of Militia could tell us something about it. Perhaps the item got into this account by mistake. At all events, of this $53,000 that was spent by the Departments of Agriculture and Public Works, upwards of $700 was for stumping powder.


Robert Rogers: Fredericton, is the capital of New Brunswick; a very important province, and a very important city. Unfortunately, as regards the farm, the district is well wooded, and it was necessary to do a great deal of stumping. My hon. friend spoke of other kinds of stumping a moment ago. I am sure he will realize on reflection that the stumping at the farm is not nearly so expensive as the kind he best understands. As regards the $10 item, the one for which I am responsible, I understand

that this was to 'buy powder with which to clear the ground for the buildings that were erected last year, at a cost of over $10,000.


William Pugsley: If stumping powder is used for blasting rock, I can understand that $700 worth be used on this particular farm because I am told it is a very rocky farm and on which nobody with a sincere desire to establish an experimental farm would have thought for a moment of choosing. I am told it was selected because it was near the capital, and because the gentleman who preceded the present member for York, N.B., happened to live in the capital and quite near the experimental farm, and evidently bad a great fancy for the sloping hillside of this particular rocky tract of country which overlooks the St. John river.


Robert Rogers: I am sure my hon. friend will acknowledge that he was a good judge.


William Pugsley: Well, probably he is a better judge now of legal matters than he was when he was a member of this House, of what would make a good experimental farm. I suppose, however, we shall have to let this item go. It is only $53,000 more gone into the sink-hole.


Robert Rogers: It is only $10.
Dominion public buildings generally, $30,000.


Frank Oliver: What I have to say has no relation to this item, but perhaps this is as good a time as any to bring to the attention of tJhe committee and of the minister the necessity for making provision for the erection o'f suitable buildings and suitable places for the care of invalid soldiers. We now know some of the conditions that have to be met, and I would certainly urge upon the Government the desirability of making provision, without delay in the 'Supplementary Estimates at this session, for the erection of buildings at suitable points in different parts of the country for the reception of invalided soldiers. The present conditions are not adequate; they are only temporary, and it is a regrettable fact which' stares the country in the face, that there will have to be permanent provision made promptly. I think the Government would be well advised, and I am sure' it would have the support of both sides of the House, if it made provision without any delay. Although we have criticised certain expenditures, desiring to see them cut down
-and we are very glad to see that the minister has agreed not to make certain expenditures at the present time-that is not to say that this matter is not one of immediate urgency and one of the requirements of which should be met adequately and immediately.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Last evening when we
were discussing some of the Estimates of the Department of Public Works, I mentioned that there were some very suitable points in Canada where such buildings as mentioned by my hon., friend should be erected. I specially mentioned Ste. Agathe because it is to-day the rival of Saranac in the Adirondacks. Thh hon. minister mentioned in connection with those hospitals for our returned soldier/s the fact that some wealthy Canadians-and I think he mentioned the name of Mr. Lome McGibbon- had offered their summer residences for use as hospitals. I wish to thank publicly those public spirited Canadians who have done so, and I hope that many others will be found offering their residences for such a noble purpose. I do not, however, believe that the offers made by some of our wealthy Canadians will completely cover the case, as with the large number of soldiers at the front, we may reasonably expect that many will come back crippled and disabled. I would certainly urge upon the minister not to be stingy in this matter of providing accommodation, and as he is not going to spend all the money which has been voted, he might very well be generous in this respect and provide for future possibilities. I certainly endorse the remarks made by [DOT]my hon. friend from Edmonton (Mr. Oliver). We have already seen that some of our soldiers have not been able to find, on their return from the other side, any other place of rest than the streets. I have seen some cases which are simply pitiable, and I call upon my hon. friend, and I make a special [DOT]appeal to his kind heartedness to see that those buildings are erected wherever needed [DOT]in the various sections of Canada.


Robert Rogers: This is a matter which is engaging the attention of the Government to a very considerable extent. It is true, as my hon. friend from Rouvdlle (Mr. Le-mieux) has stated, that we have had very generous offers from various individuals in the different provinces of Canada to place at the disposal of the Government their summer residences. The one mentioned was offered by Mr. Lome McGibbon, of Ste. Agathe. In addition to this, we have, as

hon, gentlemen will understand, our immigration buildings, which are not in very great use at the present time, at Quebec, Halifax, and other points, [DOT] and they are being turned to this particular use. At the same time the question of more permanent arrangements for our returned, invalided, and disabled soldiers has^ engaged the attention of the Government, and the matter has been turned over to the Military Hospitals Commission-the names of the members of which I am sure are familiar to the members of the House, they being representative individuals from the various provinces of Canada-for a recommendation . on their part after they have had an opportunity of studying the conditions by caring for the returned invalided soldiers, as they are doing at the present time. As soon as their recommendation is before the Government I will see that it is again considered before the Supplementary Estimates come down, with a view, if they make a definite recommendation, of having an amount placed in the Supplementary Estimates ready to meet the conditions.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: It is only right to say in regard to this matter of the care of our returned soldiers that on inquiry into the facts it will be found that up to date ample provision has been made for them by the Military Hospitals Commission, and by private generosity. So far as the soldiers who have come back to the military districts in eastern Canada are concerned, I have made the matter a subject of close inquiry, and I do not think that any soldier has been in any difficulty on account of lack of accommodation. There are ample convalescent homes in eastern Canada. We have a very excellent one in our own province. The trouble that has been found in regard to returned convalescent soldiers is to keep them in convalescent homes. Naturally, the desire of the young .Canadian is to return to his relatives, even before he is discharged. The military medical authorities, of course, desire that he should remain in the convalescent home until he is fit to be discharged. While it is true that this Government seems to deal with every problem that comes up by way of commission, and while I cannot sympathize with the feelings of their supporters in their imaginings about the terrible burdens laid upon the Government by the war, I think this Military Hospitals Commission is composed of gentlemen who have performed their duties with great assiduity, and I am bound to

say that, so far as eastern (Canada is con-' cerned, I think that up to date the convalescent soldier has been absolutely well looked after.
IVfr. ROGERS: So far as I have heard and so far as my information goes, I agree with the view expressed by the hon. member (Mr. Macdonald) that the returned soldier has been well looked after. What the hon. gentleman says is true with respect to the provinces of eastern (Canada. But he will understand that conditions in the western provinces are somewhat different. Take, for example, the city of Winnipeg. In that city we have had a very heavy enlistment, and there we have a moving population, including many who, probably, have not the opportunity of having established homes and friends. When the soldiers come back invalided from the war, they all, apparently, like to come back to the point from which they started. It has been suggested to the Military Hospitals Commission that they should make report on this particular aspect of the question of returned soldiers, in order that we may judge what is best to be done. I am sure this House would be very sorry if, regardless of ex-
10 p.m. pense, every returned soldier were not properly cared , for. When we get the report, the. House can depend upon it, the Government will take such action as is necessary to secure every needed comfort for any invalided soldier.
Ottawa public buildings-repairs, including ventilation and lighting, furniture, etc., $415,000.


William Pugsley: This is a good deal of
money to spend upon this one service. Does not the minister think that during the war, when there is need of exercising the utmost economy, he could get along very well with half that amount? Ordinary people will not be spending very much this year for new furniture or for making repairs, but will get along as economically as they can. It seems to me that the department might well do with $255,000, thus reducing this vote by $160,000. There is nothing in this vote for new buildings, but the whole amount is for ordinary repairs and furniture.


Robert Rogers: The department has endeavoured to economize in this vote, but the expenditure has grown by reason of the need to provide for a greatly increased militia staff and for other increases, and for painting, plumbing, and other repair work. The wages paid out of this item in connection with one work amounted to

something like $170,000. In addition, the furniture necessary for all the public buildings is purchased out of this vote. When the disaster overtook us by which the Parliament Buildings were destroyed, a great deal of furniture had to be provided for this building in which Parliament now meets. Practically all of this we shall be able to use because the new Customs building will soon be occupied, and anything purchased for the use of Parliament that will not be required here in the future will find a place in the new Customs building. I am glad to be able to tell my hon. friend that we were so economical and sparing in the expenditure of the vote of last year that when we were overtaken by this disaster we were able to provide all the accommodation that we have in this building without being obliged to ask Parliament for any increased amount. The amount that we have expended in the purchase of desks, chairs, rugs, and so on for the fitting up of this building has been provided out of this vote, and we have a small amount left. My hon. friend will appreciate the fact that we have been very economical. While we are asking for the same amount this year, we will take care that if it is not required it will not be spent.
Rideau Hall, including grounds-improvements, furniture and maintenance, $65,000.


William Pugsley: What ds the total amount which will be expended upon the improvements to Rideau Hall? I refer to the large improvements in the facade and the work which was done as part of one operation about a year ago.


Robert Rogers: We have not the exact
figures; about $175,000, including everything.
Rideau Hall-allowance for fuel and lignt, $17,000.


William Pugsley: If we had members who were disposed to criticise along fine Hines, as we had some time ago, it might be suggested that it is difficult to justify the expenditure of $17,000 on fuel and light for this building. But we take a somewhat broader view, and perhaps we should not trouble the minister to go into details. Is this for the dwelling alone, or does it include the out-buildings?


Robert Rogers: This is the usual vote
that has been passed for many years by this Parliament. It is payable directly to the Governor General for the purposes stated.


William Pugsley: The expenditure is not made by the department?


Robert Rogers: No.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I may recall to my hon. friend the fact that the Royal Society of Canada was founded at Rideau Hall by the late Marquis of Lome, later Duke of Argyle. The society meets sometimes at the Oh ateau , Laurier, sometimes at the Normal School, sometimes at the lOarnegie Library. This society, which is composed of the best intellectual lights in Canada, is subsidized to a small extent by the Dominion Government. It is a national institution, having its meeting place at Ottawa, and it seems to me that the Minister of Public Works, in the reorganization of the public buildings, should find space for the meetings of that society and for its library. I think the hon. minister should be able to find space either in the new Parliament buildings or in one of the adjacent buildings for this purpose. I take this opportunity of expressing also the hope that in the new buildings sufficient space will be provided for the library of Parliament. I have seen the plans and I know that the architects contemplate giving more space to the library, but there are many doubting Thomases in the library; the fear of the librarians is that their wishes may be overlooked. I sincerely hope that my hon. friend will not lose sight of the fact that our library is most precious, and that adequate provision should be made for it in the new buildings.


Robert Rogers: Ottawa public buildings-telephone service, $42,000.


William Pugsley: What is the cost per telephone?


Robert Rogers: 


William Pugsley: The telephone company charge ordinary people only $25 for one telephone. The Government must have many thousand telephones ; surely the company could make the rate at least as favourable as that which applies to their ordinary patrons.


Robert Rogers: The charge for a house telephone is $25 and for an office telephone $50. We get a flat rate of $35 a year, so that the difference is in our favour.


Rodolphe Lemieux: We have an excellent telephone service, tout some members who reside in Ottawa, or who spend some time in Ottawa during the recess, find that the telephones are taken from their rooms immediately after the close of the session. If my hon. friend pays $35 a year for each of these telephones it seems to me that the telephones should not be taken away immediately after the session. Those who utilize their rooms during the recess should have the benefit of that service.


Robert Rogers: The answer to my hon. friend is an evidence of the economy of the present Government. We have a special rate for sessional phones, which are moved out at the close of the session.


William Pugsley: I would not regard that as a very strong evidence of economy. The ordinary individual, who is most ignorant of elementary business principles, when he closes his house for five or six months, always has the telephone removed and pays only a pro rata rental.


Robert Rogers: Not always. My hon. friend does not remove the telephone when he locks up his house.


William Pugsley: He would during war time.


Robert Rogers: Oh, no.


William Pugsley: I think this requires some explanation. This is a big item, $42,000 for telephones in the city of Ottawa. It was $39,000 last year, so there is an increase of $3,000 for the present year. How does the minister account for that increase?


Robert Rogers: This is a matter of increase in the offices requiring phones. The

staff at the present time is very large, owing to war conditions.


George Perry Graham: That seems to be absolutely true.


William Pugsley: But there must be a great many clerks in the Civil (Service who previously used phones who have gone to the war and who were in offices where there has been very little to do since the war broke out. I think that number would counterbalance the increase, which has been in the Militia Department only.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I suppose it is long distance calls.


Robert Rogers: This is a small increase and it is only an estimated increase. We are not putting in more phones than we need. In fact in my own department I am very sparing in extending the telephone system, and am refusing applications regularly.
Dominion public buildings-rents, $700,000.


William Pugsley: I think we should have some explanation of this item. How much of those rente, $700,000, are paid in Ottawa?


Robert Rogers: 


William Pugsley: What was the rent of buildings in Ottawa four years ago?


Robert Rogers: I have not the amount
here, but I can get it for my hon. friend.


Rodolphe Lemieux: It was much less.


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What new public buildings were rented this year?


Robert Rogers: I have not them indicated in that way.


William Pugsley: Has the minister been
in the offices occupied by the Department of Marine and Fisheries in the Rea building?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


William Pugsley: I notice that the rent
paid for the portion of that building occupied by the Department of Marine and Fisheries alone that is the upper stories, is $40,000. Is that not a very heavy rent?


Robert Rogers: The Navy Department is in that building as well as the Marine and Fisheries Department, and the rent was figured out by the deputy minister on a basis that we have, according to the cost of the building and so on. We endeavour to pay

the same rent according to the value of the property. The rent in this particular instance is 60 cents a foot, which is very cheap compared with other rentals.


William Pugsley: I think I saw it given
in the report of the department as 70 cents a foot. That strikes me as high. I remember that I was criticised by you, Mr. Chairman (Mr. Blain), for paying a rental of 41 cents. I think there was a terrible hullabaloo about that. The Minister of Public Works was not here at that time, but these gentlemen who criticised me were pretty level-headed men, and they almost made me believe that I was paying a pretty high rental-they almost made me, they did not quite. But if anybody had suggested that I should jump from 41 .cents up to 70 cents and hope to escape criticism, I would have been astonished. This building is nicely situated, it is true, but there is a large mercantile business being carried on there. The apartments which are rented to the Government are the upper stories, which I do not imagine interfere with the mercantile business at all, and yet the enormous sum of $41,000 or $42,000 is paid for these upper stories. I do not want to be overcritical. I realize that the officials of the department are very careful. They were very careful in my time, and I have no doubt they are so to-day. But the most careful men are liable to be mistaken sometimes, and are liable to be led astray by a minister. I mean nothing personal in that remark. Perhaps the minister could tell us whether he looked into the matter himself, and whether, in his judgment, it is a fair and reasonable amount to pay for offices presided over by one minister.


Robert Rogers: In the first place, I entirely agree with my hon. friend about the level-headed gentlemen who, questioned his Estimates a few years ago. I quite appreciate the compliment he paid to hon. gentlemen on this side of the House, and I am prepared to fully endorse it. As a result of the care exercised by these hon. gentlemen at that time, a revision of the rents in the city of Ottawa took place, as my hon. friend will Tecollect, and a basis of 6 per cent on the cost was adopted with regard to rentals. That basis has been acted upon, and was acted upon in connection with the offices to which my hon. friend has referred, after the deputy minister had made his own valuation ot the property and office space to be occupied.


William Pugsley: How was the valuation arrived at? The Rea Company had a building of three stories, I think, and they were carrying on their business there. They owned the land and the buildings. Another story was put on, or possibly two stories, but the same land would be utilized, and the same support which they had for the buildings would be used for the additional stories. Of course there would have to be an elevator put in. What was estimated as the cost of the new part? Was the land, or a part of the land, taken in? Was the cost of the original building taken into account? Upon a 6 per cent basis, a rental of $42,000 would mean a cost of $700,000.


Robert Rogers: My deputy informs me that the rental basis is arrived at by a valuation, made by himself, of the property, the land, and of everything connected with the building. Then the part to be occupied is portioned off, and a value placed upon that, based upon its cost. I am informed that the cost of building the additional stories, to which my .hon. friend referred, and of providing new rooms, was $430,000. The rental was based upon a valuation by the deputy minister himself upon the actual cost, the basis being six per cent.


William Pugsley: How many new stories
were added?


Robert Rogers: There were two stories
added to the existing building, and the addition at the north end was all the way up from the ground. The cost, $430,000, did not include the value of the land. Great complaint was made by the people from whom we rented that we would not allow them enough for the space. They wanted 70 cents per cubic foot and we rented at 60 cents. My deputy is satisfied that 60 cents is a reasonable figure.
Dominion public buildings-water, $47,000.


George Perry Graham: What is the explanation of this?
>
Mr. ROGERS: This item covers water for the buildings all over the Dominion.


George Perry Graham: Does it include the water purchased by the Government or only the *water supplied from the waterworks?


Robert Rogers: Only the water supplied
from the waterworks.


George Perry Graham: Is the Government in a position to tell us what the quality of the Ottawa water is at the present time, or *what steps are being taken to have purer *water supplied in the city? Of course, it

[DOT]is not the Government that supplies this commodity, but the Government is a very large purchaser, and it may have some idea of what is being done in the matter of supplying better water by those from whom [DOT]they purchase.


Robert Rogers: I understand that the city of Ottawa is bringing in water from Lemieux island through an overland pipe.


George Perry Graham: We do not use the water for drinking purposes at present; is there [DOT]any chance of being able to do so ?	/


Robert Rogers: We will probably use the water that is being brought in from Lemieux island, if it is as pure as they say it will be.


George Perry Graham: How many years will it [DOT]take to finish the work?


Robert Rogers: They expect to finish the [DOT]work within a year; that is the information we have.


George Perry Graham: There has been a good deal of discussion about the purification of other things that men drink, but we do not seem to get very far on with the purification of the water which we ought to be drinking.


William Pugsley: I should like to call the attention of my hon. friend to the Rea building, not because I want to show the inaccuracy of his statement, but rather to give him an opportunity of correcting it. I find on page 139 of the report of the Minister of Public Works for the year ended March 31, 1915, as follows:
No. 17 0-Ottawa, Ontario-three upper stories of lessors' building, corner Rideau and Sussex streets, 62,907 square feet, at 70 cents per foot.
That is what led me to say 70 cents. The building is occupied by Marine and Fisheries and Naval Service, term expires September 9,	1919, rent $44,034.90 per
annum, lessor paying taxes, heating and elevator service, and lessee paying water. If we multiply the surface area by 70 it gives us the rental exactly; so that is 10 cents a square foot more than the minister seemed to think it was.


Robert Rogers: My deputy will have it checked up.
Yukon public buildings-rents, repairs, fuel, light, water service and caretakers' salaries, $63,000.


William Pugsley: I wish to undo an injustice which I think I did to Mr. Black when the Yukon estimates Were up before. On that occasion I stated that Mr. Black, who is clerk of the Yukon Council and

Public Administrator, had to have his accounts passed by the court, and that as he was frequently appointed judge of the court, his accounts would either have to stand or be passed by himself. I was informed a day or two ago that the accounts of the Public Administrator of the Yukon are audited, not by the judge of the court, but directly from 'Ottawa, an officer going from Ottawa every year for the purpose. I think it only right to make that correction.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mir. Rogers, the House adjourned at 10.50 p.m.
Friday, April 14, 1916.