1917-05-30

QUESTIONS.

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by asterisks.)

Mr. MARCIL:: 1.	How much has been expended on the Matapedia public highway in the Matapedia Valley, Quebec, to date?
2.	Who was in charge of this work in Rimouski county, and what amount was paid him?
3.	Is the work completed?
4.	If not, is anything to be done this year?
5.	What was the respective mileage in Rimouski and Bonaventure counties in which work was done, and what amount was expended in each county?
6.	Who was in charge of the work in Bonaventure county?


Mr. COCHRANE:: 1.	$9,979.14.
2	and 6. In 1913, Alfred Lepage, of Uauscapsal, was in charge of repairs on 5 miles of road in Matane and 2 miles in Bonaventure county; salary paid, $75, and petty disbursements, $18.35.
In 1914, again in charge of repairs on 3 miles of road in Rimouski and 5 miles in Bonaventure; salary paid, $246, and petty disbursements, $35.75. William MeCallum was also paid $63.12.
In 1915, Wm. MeCallum and Silvio Martin continued making repairs over 10 miles of road in Bonaventure county; salary paid MeCallum, $67.50, and to Martin, $46.25.
In 1916, Silvio Martin was employed in continuing the work in Bonaventure county; salary paid, $103.50, and to Mathias Blanquiere, acting foreman, $7.50.
3	and 4. No provision made to do further work.
5.	(a) About 10 miles in Bonaventure county, 3 in Rimouski and 5 in Matane; (b) about $1,800 in Matane; $6,400 in Bonaventure and $1,800 in Rimouski county.


CANADIAN EXPEDITIONARY FORCES.
[Stage Direction]
. Mr. OLIVER:
1.	What is the total number of officers and men of the Canadian Expeditionary Forces who had sailed for England up to May 1, .1917?
2.	What is the total number of officers and men enlisted for overseas service who were on duty in Canada on May 1, 1917?
3.	What is the total number of officers and men of the Canadian Expeditionary Forces reaching England on overseas service who, without having gone beyond England, have been returned to Canada as unfit for service at the front, up to May 1, 1917?
Mr. REID:: 1.	312,503 all ranks.
2.	25,475.
3.	There is no record in the department of the total number of officers and men reaching England on overseas service who, without having gone beyond England, have been returned to Canada as unfit for service at the front.


GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY-TOWN OF EDSON.
Mr. OLIVER:: 1.	Is the Government aware as to whether or not Edson, on the Grand Trunk Pacific, between Imrie and Resplendent, is a railway divisional point, with a roundhouse, repair shops, etc., or that it is a starting point of a wagon road to Sturgeon Lake and Grande Prairie?
2.	What is the population of Edson town?
3.	What is the assessed value of property in Edson town?
4.	What is the population of Edson rural municipality?
5.	What is the assessed value of property in Edson municipality? '
6.	What is the population of the settlements outside Edson town and rural municipality which receive and ship their freight' at Edson, Yates, Thornton, Rosevear, Oatley and Mac-Kay stations, respectively, on the Grand Trunk Pacific?


Mr. PATENAUDE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	500 according to the census of 1916.
3.	$1,595,255, according to provincial report for 1914.
4.	The census records of 1916 do not mention Edson rural municipality by name. Rural municipality No. 555, surrounding Edson town, had a population of 169 in 1916.
5.	$452,170, according to provincial report for 1914.
6.	Thornton, Oatley and MacKay do not appear in the census returns of 1916. Yates settlement in that year had a population of 35, and Rosevear settlement a population of 39.


MAURICE LE BLANC.
Mr. MARCIL:: 1.	Is Maurice Le Blanc, of Bonaventure, Quebec, in the employ of the Public Works Department, or any other department of the Government?
2.	If so, in what capacity, and when was he appointed?
3.	Is the appointment permanent, and what is his salary?
4.	What amounts have been paid him annually?
5.	Is the position to which he was appointed a new one?
6.	If so, who recommended the creation of such office?

7.	Were any sums paid Maurice Le Blanc apart from his salary?
8.	If so, what amounts, and why were such moneys paid?


Mr. COCHRANE:: 1.	Yes, in the Department of Public Works.
2.	General foreman under District Engineer Tache, 1st May, 1912.
3.	(a) No; (b) $1,200 per annum.
4.	Salary, travelling and disbursements: 1912-13, $1,428.88; 1913-14, $1,566.92; 1914-15, $1,538.87; 1915-16, $1,538.93; 1916-17, $1,494.91. Total, $7,568.51.
5.	The position is not a new one. See answer to No. 2.
6.	The district engineer.
7.	Yes.
8.	Answered by No. 4.



BRITISH CATTLE SUPPLY CO.

['1.\tNo homestead entries granted.\n2.\tAnswered by No. 1.\n3.\tAnswered by No. 1.']
Mr. OLIVER:: Referring to statement in the press of April 27, alleging that a deputation, consisting of Mr. F. C. Fletcher, General Manager of the Union Stock Yards, Toronto, and others, professing to represent the British subscribers of a company with a capitalization of $5,000,000, and with 492,000 acres of grazing land in Alberta, waited on the Minister of Agriculture and outlined plans for the development of the live stock industry for export purposes, and in which it is alleged that Hon. Mr. Burrell promised the co-operation of the Government in assisting production and marketing.
1.	Is it correct that such deputation waited on the Government and' that the minister replied as alleged?
2.	What was the nature of the assistance in production that was intimated by the Department of Agriculture to the deputation of this corporation ?
3.	Did it consist of a promise to provide said corporation with free use of bulls?
4.	What was the nature of the assistance in marketing, intimated to the deputation in question?
5.	Where are the lands referred to situated?
6.	How much, if any, of said lands are held under lease?
7.	If any is held under lease, how many years does such lease run?
8.	Has any arrangement been entered into between the Department of Interior and Great War Veterans' Association looking towards the cancellation of grazing leases on land suitable for farming purposes?
9.	If so, will the lands held under lease by above mentioned company come under that arrangement?



Mr. SINCLAIR:: 1.	Were tenders asked for recently, to convey the mails between Heatherton post office and the Intercolonial Railway station at Heatherton, Nova Scotia?
2.	If so, what were the names of the parties who tendered, the amount of the respective tenders and dates on which they were received?
3.	What is the name of the party whose tender was accepted, and the amount of his tender?


Mr. PATENAUDE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	The following tenders were received: Martin A. Rogers, $140; tender received, 10th April, 1917. John R. McDonald, $160; tender received 5th April, 1917.
3.	The tender of Mr. Rogers, being the lowest received, is being accepted.


GRANDE PRAIRIE IMMIGRATION HALL.
Frank Oliver: To how many persons is the Grande Prairie Immigration Hall fitted to give sleeping accommodation ?


Mr. ROCHE:: There are nine beds in the immigration hall at Grande Prairie.


TRACADIE INLAND REVENUE OFFICER-
Mr. SINCLAIR:: Is it the intention of the Department of Inland Revenue to appoint an officer at Tracadie,

N.S., to fill the place made vacant by the death of Moses Delorey?


Mr. SEVIGNY:: No.


DRAWBACKS PAID.
Mr. PARDEE:: What amounts were paid in drawbacks by the Government during the fiscal years ending March 31, 1916, and March .81, 1917, to the following firms:	Cockshutt Plow Company,
Brantford; Verity Plow Company, Brantford; International Harvester Company, Hamilton; Frost and Wood Company, Smiths Falls; Massey Harris Company, Toronto; Ford Motor Company, Windsor; and Quaker Oats Company, ^Peterborough ?


Mr. REID:: Amounts paid in drawbacks.
Fiscal year Fiscal year ended	ended
March 31, March 31, 1916.	1917.
Cockshutt Plow Co., Ltd.,
Brantford, Ont	$	6,323.46 $ 10,163.84
Verity Plow Oo., Ltd.,
Brantford, Ont	 21.18 Nil.
International Harvester Co., Ltd., Hamilton, Ont.	63,935.11	29,020.23
Frost & Wood Co., Ltd.,
Smiths Falls, Ont.... Nil. 8,581.08 Massey-Harris Co., Ltd.,
Toronto, Ont.. 31,872.58	97,118.70
Ford Motor Co., Ltd.,
Windsor, Ont. 127,066.10	371,481.29
Quaker Oats Company,
Peterborough,	Ont.	.	.	264,513.52	231,125.09


OGILVIE FLOUR MILLS COMPANY, LIMITED.
*Mr. KYTE:: 1.	What was the amount of Business Profits Tax levied upon the Ogilvie Milling Company, Limited, in the fiscal year ending March 31, 1917?
2.	What were the net earnings of the company during said year, and the percentage of profits distributed to its shareholders?
3.	What is the amount of the issued capital stock of the said company, preferred and common, respectively?


Sir THOMAS WHITE:: The question relates to the Ogilvie Milling Company, Limited. I think the hon. member (Mr. Pardee) is mistaken as to the name of the company but upon the assumption that he means the Ogilvie Flour Mills Company, Limited, as I think he does, I make this reply:
1.	No assessment was levied against the Ogilvie Milling Company, Limited. The amount of the assessment levied during fiscal year 1917 against the Ogilvie Flour Mills Company, Limited, for accounting period of 1915, was $280,885.85.
2.	Returns have not been received showing net earnings made or profits distributed by the company during fiscal year 1917.
IMr. Sinclair.]
3. Accounting period ended August 31,
1915.
Preferred Stock	$2,000,000.00
Common Stock	 2,500,000.00
Accumulated Profits_________ 1,122,466.46
Capital employed	$5,622,466.46
Under section 7 (4) of the Business Profits War Tax Act unimpaired reserve, rest or accumulated profits of an incorporated company shall be included as part of its capital.


LT.-COL. DESJARDINS.
Mr. CARVELL:: 1.	Is Lieutenant-Colonel L. G. Desjardins, of Quebec, actually employed by the Department of Militia and Defence?
2.	If so, what is the nature of his functions?
3.	What salary does he receive?
4.	What amount has he received so far?


Mr. REID:: 1.	No.
2,	3, and 4. Answered by No. 1.


CONSTRUCTION OF ICE BREAKER.
Mr. LANCTOT:: In view of the declaration of the Honourable Minister of Marine, in the course of last summer, at Montreal, at the launching of the icebreaker J. D. Hazen, built especially to prevent inundations of the St. Lawrence, particularly along the bank of the river in the Counties of Laprairie and Chambly-Vercheres, is it the intention of the Government to have another icebreaker constructed before the next breaking up of the ice?	'


Mr. HAZEN:: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Lanctot) who asks this question is evidently under some misapprehension in regard to the facts. I was not present at the launching of the ice-breaker referred to and consequently did not make any declaration on that occasion. I think my hon. friend must have in mind some remarks I made on some other occasion although I do not know when it was. I may say, however, in answer to the hon. gentleman's question, which is affected very much by the earlier part of the statement, that the matter to which he refers is now under consideration.


LT.-COL. MAYNARD ROGERS.
Frank Oliver: Up to what date did the Government pay to Lieutenant-Colonel Maynard Rogers salary as Superintendent of Jasper Park?


William Roche: February 28, 1917.


MR. AMBROSE GREY.
Mr. OLIVER:: 1.	Is Ambrose Grey, Conservative Provincial Candidate in Beaver River Constituency, Alberta, in the employ of the Government?

2.	If so, what date did the said Ambrose Grey enter the employ of the Dominion Government?
3.	What is the nature of his appointment?
4.	What is his salary?
5.	Has his employment, if any, ceased?
6- If so, at what date did such employment cease ?
Mr, ROCHE: '
1.	No.
2.	June 27, 1913.
3.	Homestead inspector.
4.	$1,300 per year.
5.	Yes.
6.	Yes, January 31, 1917.


GEO. CLOAKEY.
Mr. OLIVER:: 1.	Is Geo. Cloakey, Conservative Provincial Candidate in Olds Constituency, Alberta, in the employ of the Government?
2.	If so, what date did said Geo. Cldakey enter the employ of the Dominion Government?
3.	What is the nature of his appointment?
4.	What is his salary?
5.	Has his employment ceased? If so, at what date?


Mr. ROCHE:: 1.	No.
2.	21st November, 1913.
3.	Ranch inspector.
4.	$1,500 per year.
5.	Yes, 21st May, 1917.
baddeck mail contract.


Mr. McKENZIE:: 1.	When does the new contract for carrying
the mails between Baddeck River, North Branch and Forks Baddeck, Victoria County, N.S., go into effect?	.
2.	When did the old contract terminate?
3.	Was the old contractor offered a renewal of his contract?
4.	If so, did he decline to accept?
5.	Who is the present contractor?
6.	Was the service put up for public tender?
7.	Was the present contractor the lowest tenderer?
8.	Who were the tenderers, and what was the amount of their respective tenders?


Mr. PATENAUDE:: 1.	1st July, 1917.
2.	The contract now in force will terminate 30th June, 1917.
3.	Yes.
4.	No.
5.	D. McPhee.
6.	No.
7 and 8. Answered by No. 6.


NAMES OF HOMESTEADERS.
Mr. OLIVER:: 1. What are the names of homesteaders on Sections, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 16, 17, 18, 19, 30 and 31 in Township Sixty-three Range Eight, West of the 4th Meridian?
2.	When did they make entry?
%	3. Wlhat is the number of each settler's
homestead ?


Mr. ROCHE:: 1.	George Ward, Timody Dumont, James Ward.
2.	George Ward, 5th June, 1911; Timody Dumont, 26th December, 1913; James Ward, 15th April, 1912.
3.	George Ward, N.E. I of 5; Timody Dumont, N.W. I of 5; James Ward, S.E. i of 5.


Mr. OLIVER:: 1.	What are the names of the homesteaders on Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 in Township Seventy-one, Range Twenty-two, West of the 5th Meridian?
2.	When did they make entry?
3.	What is the number of each settler's homestead ?


Mr. ROCHE:: 1.	No homestead entries granted.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Answered by No. 1.



DELAY IN ANSWERING QUESTIONS. .

Mr. CARVELL:: May I draw to the attention of the ministry the fact that question No.' 4 has been standing on the Order Paper for nearly a month, and while I realize that the Government are very busy, it does seem to me that they could find time to answer this question. I would like to know if I can expect an answer on the next day when questions are called.


Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: Yes, I think my hon. friend can expect an answer. I will look after it.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURN.

Mr. COPP:: 1.	How many persons have been appointed to permanent positions on the Canadian Government Railways from January 1, 1916, to March 31, 1917, who were not previously employed on the said Railways?
2.	What are their names, their salaries and the positions to which they were appointed?


Mr. TURRIFF:: 1.	In connection with Military Posts No. 12 and No. 13 in the County of Grenville or that vicinity, what is the cost per month for each?
2.	What is the total cost for each since they were fir3t established?



UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS.

Mr. McKENZIE:: For a copy of all correspondence between the Post Office Department and the Post Office Inspector, for Nova Scotia in respect to the mail route between Baddeck River, North Branch, and Baddeck Forks, and also of all the correspondence between Dan McPhee, Mail Contractor on said route and the said Post Office Inspector, between the 1st of January and the 20th of May, 1917.


Mr. MACDONALD:: For a copy of all correspondence, letters, cables and other documents exchanged between the Imperial Government or any of its members or officials with the Canadian Government or any of its members or officials, relative to the question of the proposed legislation by the Imperial Parliament to validate certain Acts and proceedings of the Legislature of British Columbia.



GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY. REMOVAL, OF RAILS FOR USE IN FRANCE.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hon FRANK OLIVER (Edmonton):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to ask leave to move the adjournment of the House under Rule 39, for the purpose of discussing a matter of urgent public importance, namely, the lifting of the rails of the Grand Trunk Pacific railway west of Edmonton, now in progress.
And leave having been granted.


Frank Oliver: Mr. Speaker, although the subject matter of this motion relates to a part of the country very distant from the Capital, I hope it is not considered to be less important by the people of this part of Canada than it is by those in the part of Canada directly affected. This matter has been brought to my attention by urgent telegrams, one from the Jasper Park collieries, which I read to the House yesterday, and the other from the secretary of the Board of Trade of the town of Edson. Both the Jasper Park colleries and^the town of Edspn are very intimately and directly affected by the action now being taken. It is nearly six months since notice was first given in the newspapers that the Government intended taking this action. That announcement naturally aroused considerable interest, especially amongst the people most directly affected. When the House was convened in January I t.ook the liberty of asking my friend the Minister of Railways (Mr. Cochrane) if such action were contemplated, and was informed by him, if I remember correctly, that it was not. The people then rested easy and were satisfied that no such action was intended. It was a shock to them to learn that it was definitely and deliberately intended that the means of communication upon which they depended, the existence of which alone made it possible for them to be where they were and to do 'business, was about to he t,aken away from them without consideration of any kind whatever, and without information to the public or to the Parliament of this country. While I 
do not wish to speak in a controversial tone on this occasion, I am bound to say that I do not think it right that this country of Canada and the people of Canada should be governed in that way. Surely when, for. good or bad reason, it is intended by the Government of the country to absolutely destroy the value of the property owned by citizens of this country, to -take from them the returns upon the time they have employed in their present location, the least that these people and the country at large are entitled to its information as to how, when and why, the reasons for such action in absolute detail. This House of Commons, representing the people of this country, are entitled to that information at the hands of this Government. I am sorry to say that when I brought- the matter to the attention of the hon. minister yesterday in the terms of a most urgent telegram from an enterprise that depends upon its -business for its profits and to which a delay of only one day means a very considerable financial loss, I was given very little satisfaction.. This House and this country are entitled to more than a general statement that this company is -going to be taken care of; it is entitled to know how this company is going to be -taken care of and when it is going to be taken care of. The amount of money that is invested in- this enterprise is sufficiently great to mean -that a large number of citizens are affected, and every man knows that in the case of an industrial enterprise of this character, any action that has the effect of discrediting -that enterprise certainly must have an injurious effect upon the investment of capital in it. So the least the Government can- do when it is taking such action is, by giving the fullest possible -information at the earliest possible date, to minimize the loss by eliminating uncertainty. The Jasper Park colleries is an enterprise which was undertaken at the time of the construction of the Grand Trunk railway. The collieries are located absolutely on the line of the railway, they are most conveniently situated. The coal is of a character suitable for locomotive purposes and the enterprise of the collieries is absolutely dependent upon the enterprise of the railway, partly for the coal sold to the Tailway company for use in its locomotives, and partly by reason of the facilities afforded by the railway for the transportation of coal to other customere.


Mr. PUGSLEY:: Is the colliery on the
main line?


Frank Oliver: On the main line of the
Grand Trunk Pacific railway. It is so fortunately situated that in the earlier stages of development it was possible to chute the coal down into the cars of the railway company. There is no doubt that the convenience of location was in large measure the inducement to people to invest their money in the enterprise, and when this Government, in broad, general terms, announces that as a part of its policy those rails are to be tom up and does not vouchsafe to this House or any one else any suggestion ias to what else is being done in the matter, I say it is deliberately undertaking to wreck an important industrial enterprise in the province of Alberta-and that is not the business of any Government, no matter who is its leader or who compose it.
This subject has been before the public in the eastern press for a considerable period, and in order that the House may understand the facte, I shall have to ask the liberty of trespassing for a few moments to explain the actual situation. I have seen statements in the press that for two or three hundred miles the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Canadian Northern railway were duplicated, occupying the same territory, and without any reason for two lines of railway. In this particular case I want to say that the Jasper Park Collieries are situated at the foot of Mount Miette, one of the outer chain of the Rockies, on the south side of the Atha-baska river. The valley of the Atha-baska river forms the eastern part [DOT] of *what is generally known as the Yellowhead pass, and gives entrance from the prairies into the mountains from the east side. It happens that the Athabaska river at that point is spread into a lake, or rather a series of lakes, Jasper lake and Brule lake, so it is not a matter merely of crossing the river but, if there is to be communication across the river, a matter of bridging several miles, which, of course, would be quite impossible. These lakes run for a length of a little over thirty miles, and it happens that the Grand Trunk Pacific goes up on the one side of these lakes and the Canadian Northern railway on the other, so that when the Grand Trunk track i6 taken away, as it is being taken away, there is no question that the Jasper Park colleries are left absolutely in the air. Commercially, they might as well be in Palestine as where they are. I have seen the suggestion that where the Government is going to tear up the Grand Trunk Pacific tracks-and where they are needed, if
you please-the rails are to be replaced by Canadian Northern rails that are to be taken up. The Canadian Northern runs for thirty odd miles on one side of the Athabaska river and the lakes, and the Grand Trunk Pacific on the other. The Jasper Park colleries are on the south side, and the Grand Trunk Pacific depends largely on these collieries for its supply of fuel. Colleries are being developed on the other iside of the lake, one set by the Canadian Northern and another by the Jasper Park Colleries company, so that no one line of railway can by any possibility develop the coal properties on each aide of the Athabaska vallley in that stretch of the road. When the proprietors of the Jasper Park colleries see the track being taken up, they are told in a most indefinite way that they are going to be taken care of- though they know that the removal of the Canadian Northern tracks on the. other side would leave the collieries there in exactly the same position. I submit that the answer given to the question of the Jasper Park Colleries company regarding . the removal of these rails' is not by iany means satisfactory.
I have received telegrams not only from the Jasper Park colleries, but also from the town of Edson, which is a divisional point on the Grand Trunk Pacific railway, 130 miles west of Edmonton. It is the starting point of a provincial wagon road to Grand Prairie, and it has roundhouses and all the equipment of a divisional point. Two brajich railroads communicate with coal mines west of Edson, so that Edson takes care of the traffic not only on the main lines, but on these two branches which form a junction with the main line a little west of the town, at a place called Bickerdike-Which makes the hon. member for St. Lawrence, Montreal', famous. The population of Edison is 600. The assessed value of the land in the town is over $1,000,000; its public buildings are worth $100,000 and other buildings $250,000. It has a debenture debt of $80,000. Surrounding the town of Edson is a rural municipality with 300 voters and with an assessment of $283,000. Beyond the municipality is a settlement which includes over 1,000 people, who settled there in the express understanding and belief that they were to have the l>enefit of the Grand Trunk Pacific railway as their means of communication. While there are portions of the line between Edmonton and Tete Jaune Cache where the two railways are very close
1$22


John Douglas Hazen: Which one is that?


Frank Oliver: I could not make the
distinction. The Canadian Pacific has a double track from Port Arthur eastward. They were going to dtouble track it all the way to Montreal, and they got it partially ooimpieted before the slump came before the war. Then they ceased' construction, and the rails of that double track road are lying there still. The taking up of those rails would not affect injuriously the interests of any private citizen. It would, of course, be to- the disadvantage of the Canadian Pacific, but the Canadian Pacific has other lines, and I submit that until they find it necessary to double track all the way through, that portion of the road is of minor importance and of minor usefulness. But we do not lay hands on the Canadian Pacific. It seems that the rails of the Canadian Pacific are bored a little differently from the rails of the Grand Trunk, although both are of the same quality and weight of -steel.
The Canadian Northern and the Canadian Pacific are parallel from the foot of Kamloops . Lake to Yale in British Columbia, a distance of over 100 miles. Does the presence of those two roads increase the development of that part of the country? Why no one who has ever gone through that section would ever suggest such an absurdity. Is there so much traffic over these two roads that one road cannot carry it all? That is not true, either. I am reminded also that from Port Arthur to Nipigon the Canadian Northern and Canadian Pacific are parallel, and the Canadian Pacific is double-tracked for that distance

if I am not mistaken. There is no development there, and no possibility of development here or hereafter, now or in the future. So I say the conclusion is absolutely irresistible that this attach upon the Grand Trunk west of Edmonton is simply an attack upon the enterprise, and is made not with regard to the interests of the British Government and not in the interests of winning the war. It. is not fair dealing as between the people that are affected, and the people that would be affected by the lifting of rails in other parts of the country. But because these rails are out in Alberta or in the Rocky Mountains, because they are not in the great province of Ontario, it does not matter. I hope we have a House of Commons here that is a House of Commons for Canada, and not a House of Commons for any one province of Canada; a House of Commons that realizes that the growth of Canada depends upon the growth of every part of this country and that connection through the Rocky Mountains by the best possible pass is an absolutely necessary factor in the development of this country both east and west of the mountains.
We are told that these tracks must be torn up in order to win the war; that these rails are required in France, and therefore they must be taken up at -once because rails cannot be got anywhere else. Now, first of all, I am going to make an assertion, and it is this: the rails that have already been taken up on the 300 miles of the eastern part of the Transcontinental are not yet in France, nor is there any possibility of their being in France for a very considerable period. If rails are wanted in France, I ask you, Sir, and I ask this House, if they cannot be got, just as rails can he got to be used on roads in the Dominion of Canada. A short time ago I asked this question:
1.	Are rails for renewal purposes now required on the Intercolonial Railway?
2.	Will the rails so required, in all or in part, be rolled at Sydney or Sault Ste. Marie, under arrangements with the Imperial Munitions Board ?
Mr. Cochrane:
1 Yes.
2. To be rolled at Sydney.
Now, if rails can be rolled at Sydney for the Intercolonial, I fancy they can be rolled at Sydney for use in France, if it is desired to roll them at that point. But never mind about Sydney. There are on the other side of the line enormous plants for the production of railway material, including rails, and every man knows that it is only a ques-

tion of price whether those rails can be procured or not. If the price of rails to-day is $40 a ton, and rails cannot be got at that money, is there anybody who will say that they could not be got for $80 a ton on the other side of the line?


Mr. R. B. BENNETT:: Yes.


Frank Oliver: Because anybody who says so certainly is not paying due regard to the facts.	.


Richard Bedford Bennett: They cannot be got for less than $100 a ton.


Frank Oliver: My hon. friend has my answer already. I saw in yesterday's papers that the Russian Government is able to make a contract with firms in the United States for supplying locomotives. Could not they have made a contract for an equal value of steel rails if they had paid the price? I think they could. My hon. friend mentions $100 a ton. I ask you, Sir, will $100 a ton pay the damages to the Grand Trunk Railway Company, to my constituents, and to the people of Canada, resulting from the tearing up of these tracks? I say it will not begin to pay it, and an honest endeavour to do the best that could be done to help the war in France would have caused this Government to secure those rails from the United States at whatever price was necessary rathe: than tear up the rails in our own country, thereby discommoding our own people, discrediting our own enterprise, and in the end charging the British Government two or three times as much as they should have paid.
There are railways being built in Canada to-day, and there are many more that ought to be built. Rails are being bought for these railways. Rails are being laid now on a road 300 miles in length from Edmonton to Fort McMurray; were laid during the winter, and are being laid to-day. These rails were purchased somewhere, and I do not imagine that the management of that road have more resources with which to buy rails than has this Government. The Government is engaged in the construction of a railway on its own account, the Hudson Bay railway. We have been told that they have slackened construction on that road, that they are not going to push it to a finish. Well, if they are not going to push it to a finish, and at an early day too, I will ask these hon. gentlemen of what use under heaven are these rails that have already been laid, or the rails that are piled up ready to be used, but which will not be used? I am a supporter of the Hudson Bay
railway; I believe that that road should be pushed to completion, and pushed to completion at the earliest day. But if the Government is not going to use these rails for the Hudson Bay road, and is not going to finish the road, then why not use these rails instead of tearing up the rails of the Grand Trunk Pacific west of Edmonton?


Hon. FRANK COCHRANE (Minister of Railways):: I am more than surprised at the extravagant statements made by the hon. member for Edmonton (Mr. Oliver). He seems to know more about what rails are required and what rails should go forward for use at the front than the British Government do. These rails are laid under fire in many cases, and the British
4 p.m. Government have asked us to send rails of the same borings and the same kind as before, so that they may be laid as easily and as quickly as possible. And now the statement is made again that we are bound to ruin the construction of the Grand Trunk Pacific and Transcontinental. It is all bosh-nothing but bosh. I have heard a great deal from the other side of the House to the effect that we have degraded the line and all that kind of thing. Why, that is all wrong; it is impossible. It is as good a road as ever has been laid; it has never been degraded in any sense of the word. I defy any one to prove it.


Frank Oliver: Then why tear it up?


Francis Cochrane: I would tear up the whole Transcontinental, yes, and every other railway in Canada, to win the war.


Frank Oliver: Then why would not the hon. gentleman take a few Canadian Pacific Railway rails?


Francis Cochrane: Because, as I have told you, the British Government asked us to send rails of the same kind as those sent before. We sent over 300 miles of rails taken from the Transcontinental, taking up many of- the sidings, and rails in terminal points, which are not necessary at present, because they were laid to provide for a larger business than the road is likely to have for many a year.


William Pugsley: Are not the railways in France on which these rails are being laid narrow gauge lines carrying light engines for the purpose of moving supply trains?


Francis Cochrane: I do not know what railways they are used for-


William Pugsley: That is the statement made.


Francis Cochrane: The statement made to us is that they want the same kind of rails that were sent before. The hon member for Edmonton (Mr. Oliver) tells the House, though he does not know anything about it, that the rails of the 300 miles already torn up have not been sent away. It is true they have not been sent across the ocean, but they are at Three Rivers, and the balance of them will go in a very short time. The authorities on the other side are urging us and cabling us day by day to get these rails ready at the seaboard, so that they may be got over as soon as transport can be furnished. The hon. member talks about the town of Edson. I have answered once before that I will look after the town of Edson.


William Pugsley: In what way?


Francis Cochrane: I don't know. But I have two engineers out there who are laying out plans to that end, and they know more - about it than does my hon. friend from Edmonton. I have also said that the Jasper Coal Mines will be looked after. I cannot tell the House just, how, at this time, but I hope in a short time to have a map showing on paper exactly how the work will be carried on. I am not going to make a statement about something I do not know about. I am going to look after the different interests along that line, and I am going to carry out what the British Government want, no matter what it is.


Frank Oliver: But you don't ask something from the Canadian Pacific Railway?


Francis Cochrane: Because, I tell you, the Canadian Pacific Railway rails have different borings. I would like to send him to the front, by Heavens, to lay these rails.


Frank Oliver: I want him to understand that I am represented at the front. Is he?


Francis Cochrane: I know you are, but you don't talk as if you were. The hon. gentleman's talk is for pure politics, and nothing else. He thinks his chances for re-election are so bad that he will have to make use of everything, turning this whole war into a political game, instead of fighting it out as he ought.


Mr. TURRIFF:: That is what the Government has done from the start.


Francis Cochrane: No, they have not.
We had a lot of second-hand rails on the Intercolonial and Transcontinental, but we want to send over rails of the same kind as we sent before. We propose to take

care of every interest along these different roads. If we cannot do it altogether, then the British Government have agreed that they will look after any damage that may occur.


William Pugsley: Have the Grand Trunk Pacific been consulted about this and have they consented? Have the bondholders consented as well?


Francis Cochrane: The Grand Trunk
Pacific has been asked.


William Pugsley: The bondholders have a lien on these rails.


Francis Cochrane: But the Government are behind the guarantee, I am sorry to say.


William Pugsley: I am afraid they will be behind it, if they take the bondholders' property without their consent.


Francis Cochrane: I hope in a few days to be able to lay on the Table a map showing how we will be able to take care of the industries along the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Canadian Northern. This is going to cost some money but nothing like the * amount indicated in the extravagant statement of my hon. friend. He said we could buy rails in the United States if we paid for them. I say it can not be done; we have tried it. Nor can we buy rails in Canada unless we take the steel companies off the manufacturing of billets to make shells with; and it is necessary, by Heavens, to keep these going in order to win the war. It don't make any difference; anything they want for the war they. will get it, no matter what it is.


William Pugsley: I congratulate the House, and I congratulate the Government, upon the very admirable speech the Minister of Railways (Mr. Cochrane) has made. It is a delight to this side of the House to have the minister unbosom himself, to take the House into his confidence and let us really know what he has in his mind with regard to this matter.
The minister has done, I think, the very best he could, but in the end he tells us that he is going to look after Edson although he does not know how he he is going to do it. I wou,ld like to ask the House if it would not have been better for the minister to have asked for a day or two's delay before finally disposing of this matter so that he could have informed the House-[DOT]


Francis Cochrane: Of course, nothing can be delayed on that side.


William Pugsley: The minister says that
he is going to tear up all the rails in Canada in order to win the war.


Francis Cochrane: No, I did not say
that.


William Pugsley: If necessary to win the war. That is a very laudable desire and I think we would all agree to it if it were necessary to win the war. We would do anything that could be done, but the -question is. whether the minister has done the wisest thing that he could have done having that object in view. What is the excuse that the minister gives? Here we have a condition in the West where the line which is being stripped of its rails is a part of the main transcontinental railway connecting the Atlantic with the Pacific and a railway which was built for the purpose of carrying on transcontinental business. It has been explained by my hon. friend from Edmonton (Mr. Oliver) that for a considerable distance in the section of the mountains where these rails are to be taken up, the Canadian Northern runs along one side of a lake, some 30 miles in length, and the Grand Trunk Pacific on the other side, and that there is a large colliery to which accommodation is being, given whose development has been created by the Grand Trunk Pacific. I do not care how many engineers the minister gets out there, unless he can replace these nails on that portion of the line which runs past the Jasper collieries, he cannot give accommodation to them. It is absolutely clear from the statement which has -been made by my hon. friend from Edmonton that unless the track is re-laid he would have to build a bridge three miles long across the lake in order to connect the Jaspar colleries with the Canadian Northern railway, .so that St would be necessary that the rails which he is having taken up from this portion of the Grand Trunk Pacific shall be supplied by rails from some other source in order to give the accommodation that he says he is going to give. Just how he is going to give it he does not know. I think it is very unfortunate that the minister did not learn from his engineers how this accommodation could be given to the town of Edson, the Jasper collieries and all that section of the country before deciding to take this drastic measure of stripping this railway of its rails. The minister says that the British Government wanted these rails. These rails, I suppose, weigh 90 pounds to the yard. The minister will correct me if I am wrong.


Francis Cochrane: Eighty pounds.


William Pugsley: There are many portions of the Government railway system where the rails are very much lighter.


Francis Cochrane: Have they the same borings?


William Pugsley: What does my hon. friend mean by borings?


Francis Cochrane: Do you not know? Then, if you do not, you ought not to talk about it.


William Pugsley: I do not know; I am ignorant upon the subject. What is the meaning of it?


Francis Cochrane: Different railways have rails with different borings. The rails of the Canadian Pacific are not bored in the same way. as the rails of the Grand Trunk Pacific, or of the Canadian Northern. They particularly asked us to send rails of the same borings so that there would be no trouble in making the connections.


William Pugsley: That strikes me as a most absurd statement. Do I understand by borings that the minister means the rolling of the rails, or does he mean the boltings?-


Francis Cochrane: Yes.


William Pugsley: For making the connections? That is what I thought it was. Can the minister explain to you, Mr. Speaker, how, if 20, or 30, or 40, or 50, or 100 miles of rails were sent over there to be laid, it would make much difference as to what the borings were upon that 100 miles?


Francis Cochrane: Well, the British Government do not know what they want, of course, according to the hon. gentleman'.


William Pugsley: We heard the other day that the British engineers thought it would take six weeks to lay some few miles of railway track, but Jack Stewart, a Canadian, and his fellow officers did the business in four days. I am not disposed to place the judgment of British engineers above that of Canadian engineers.
M/. COCHRANE:	They are Canadian
engineers who- are laying the railway.


William Pugsley: Surely, if there were 50 miles of rails taken from a portion of the Grand Trunk Pacific system, and weighing 80 pounds to the yard, and if there were 50 miles of other rails, all they would have to do would toe to make one connection and the rest of the laying would be uniform. There is hardly a railway in Canada on which you will not see two or more classes of rails. You will see old rails, some 60,

some 65 and some 70 pounds to the yard, and you will see new rails weighing 80 pounds to the yard, and in some cases 90 pounds. I am reminded by my hon. friend from South Renfrew (Mr. Graham) that some rails from Ithe Canadian Northern railway are being placed on the Transcontinental railway and there is no reason in the world why it should not be done. I know that they have laid new rails on the Intercolonial railway and that there are many miles of the road where for years there was a different description of rail, a different weight of rail and a rail having different borings used from that which was used on other portions of the line. Men acquainted with the practical work of laying rails have no difficulty, and it is all moonshine for the minister to tell me, and to tell this House, that the British Government, or the engineers of the British Government, require that the rails should be . of the same weight and of the same borings. It is too absurd and every man in this House knows it. It is not necessary to be Minister of Railways to know that. Any member of this House who knows anything about railways at all will know that the statement I make is absolutely correct. We have had it in our own experience and it is within the knowledge of every man who has lived alongside of a line of railway. I have heard it stated by gentlemen who have been at the front that what is required in France is rails for the building of light railways. I think they are narrow gauge railways a3 a rule. That is what I have been told. I have not had the opportunity -and a very great opportunity it would have been-of being at the front, but I have been informed by gentlemen who have been there that the railways are light railways and usually narrow gauge. Of course, necessarily, they are carrying comparatively light loads and a light rail would be all that would be required. I think the minister would have been better advised if he had taken rails weighing 60 or 65 pounds to the yard, which could have been got from many of the railways in Eastern Canada, and sent them to the front. But the minister, apparently without touching the Canadian Pacific, without touching the Canadian Northern, without touching the rails which are lying at Hudson Bay for the Hudson Bay railway, goes to the railway which this Government would like to discredit. I say that advisedly notwithstanding that the minister may deny it. This Government started in when the rail-
way was nearly built to discredit it by changing the grades or rather by not making the grades up to the specification and not making the railway the first-class road which the late Government intended it should be. They have not provided proper terminals in connection with it. They have neglected altogether the national obligation which rested upon them insofar as Eastern Canada was concerned to create terminals for the Grand Trunk Pacific upon the St. Lawrence at Quebec and at St. John which was to be the eastern freight terminus of the Transcontinental railway. They have absolutely neglected their duty in that respect. They did not create the terminals at Quebec which they were to do. They made, at great expense, a change which will take away very largely from the usefulness of the Grand Trunk Pacific as a transcontinental gnad. They have done all this without the consent of the authorities of 'the 'Grand Trunk Pacific, and no-w they go to work, as a final step in the wrecking of a national railway, and take up the rails Which are owned by the bondholders of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway, because, if the company is in default, these (bondholders have a right to look to the railway, to its equipment, to its rails, to its entire property, as their security. The Government have done that without even saying " by your leave " to these bondholders, who are the ones immediately interested., not merely the first bondholders, whose bonds are guaranteed by the Government, but any second or third bondholders who may have liens against the road. They have no right to do that without the consent of these gentlemen. Therefore, I for one feel bound to say that, notwithstanding the statement of the Minister of Railways, he could have done much more effective service for the British Government in getting rails in eastern Canada where it would not have been necessary to make this break in a great transcontinental .system; he would have been, able to do it with less expense, and with much less likelihood of the British Government being called upon to pay heavy damages.
I think also it is to be regretted that the minister simply tells ns to-day that he is going to look after this colliery and is going to look after Edson, but does not say how. There is another serious phase to this question. The interruption at this time of the operation of a great coal mine in western Canada is a matter of the most serious character.


Francis Cochrane: Will the interruption of the operation of that coal mine or the interruption of the prosecution of the war at the front toe the more serious matter for Canada?
iMr. PUGSLEY: I should like to see both carried on. I should like to see no interruption of the collieries operation, and no interruption of the war.


Francis Cochrane: You do not speak
like it.


William Pugsley: But I think the interest of the people of Canada ought to be considered also. This Government does not seem to care one iota for the people of Canada.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


William Pugsley: They think they can get great glory and kudos because our boys go to the front and perform heroic deeds. They think they can get great kudos by sending rails to England. They think they can get great kudos by lending money to the Imperial Munitions Board to build ships in Canada. But they have taken no single step, so far, for the benefit of the people of Canada. They have taken no step to improve transportation.


Mr. NICKLE:: Does the hon. member not consider that the Canadian boys at the front, whose condition is going to be alleviated by the construction of railroads, are part of the people of Canada?


William Pugsley: I certainly do, but I consider that there are people left in Canada too. We have to-day the spectacle of the interests of the people of Canada being entirely neglected by this Government. Let me give a few instances while I am' on my feet. 1 do this because the Minister of Railways has spoken as he has done. Look at the cost of coal. I speak of this because keeping down the price of coal and supplying coal to our people in abundance is of great importance both in the East and in the West, and any interruption of a great coal mining industry in the West must prove a very great disadvantage. We have learned that several collieries in western Canada are closed. There is very great danger of people being short of fuel, and to be short of fuel in our Canadian West when the winter season comes on might almost bring the people to a state when many of them might freeze to death. Is that of no concern to. the minister?
Apparently not. Apparently he has not thought of that question at all; he tears up these rails, which are necessary in order to give that colliery an outlet for their product. So in regard to shipbuilding, if the Minister of Marine will allow me to say a word upon it. I do it because it is a question-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


George Eulas Foster: Order.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order. The hon. member must confine himself to the subject under discussion.


William Pugsley: I am referring to this because the Minister of Railways has made a charge against me, and has said that he would do everything in order to win the war.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: The Minister of Railways has no authority to vary the rules of the House.


William Pugsley: The Minister of Railways interrupts the House so seldom that, perhaps, great privileges should be given to him when he does, and I might be pardoned for following him; hut, Sir, I bow to your ruling cheerfully. I say to the minister as a last word, in all sincerity, that he can get an abundance of rails in eastern Canada without interfering with the operation of a transcontinental system. He can get them without interfering with any great industry. He ought to do that, and the fact that he has not disturbed the Canadian Northern railway or the Canadian Pacific railway-


Francis Cochrane: I am disturbing the Canadian Northern railway, and the hon. member admitted that we were disturbing it.


William Pugsley: Where?


Francis Cochrane: We are replacing the Grand Trunk Pacific rails with Canadian Northern rails.


William Pugsley: But the minister is not taking up any rails from the Canadian Northern railway to send abroad.


Francis Cochrane: No.


William Pugsley: He is not doing that. He merely lays hold of the Grand Trunk Pacific railway, and that is evidence that he has but very little regard as to whether or not he interrupts the business of a transcontinental railway. To stop a great railway like the Grand Trunk Pacific while it is being stripped of its rails means a very great deal of damage which somebody will



have to pay in the future. The taking up of the rails without the consent of the bondholders is also a matter of very great importance. Will the minister allow me to ask him to submit to this House, if he will, the correspondence which he has had with regard to the furnishing of rails, and also any correspondence or agreement which he has had with the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company with respect to the taking up of these rails. I should be very glad if the minister would do that.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Speaker, I, like the hon. gentleman from Edmonton (Mr. Oliver), reside in the province of Alberta. I have received telegrams and letters asking me to investigate the circumstances under which the rails of the Grand Trunk Pacific railway are being lifted west of Edmonton. I have contented myself with making the most careful investigation possible, and I do not propose tc enter into any discussion in this House this afternoon as to the past railroad history in this country. I shall tell the House shortly the story as I have obtained it after the most careful investigation. The authorities overseas requested the Dominion of Canada to furnish 300 miles of rails of a given weight. Thev asked at the same time that the abnormal number of 1,200 turnouts be supplied with the 300 miles of track. Any gentleman who is familiar with railroad matters knows that 1,200 turn-outs is out of all proportion to 300 miles of track. It is, as you will observe, four turnouts to the mile. I ascertained further, not only from what I have seen, but from what I have been told by engineers, that these rails were required to be of great weight, and the turn-outs of equal weight, because the rails are being laid at night under shell fire; they are being laid for a given, definite purpose, and that purpose is to enable us to fight the enemy with heavy artillery rather than with flesh and blood as we have done on previous occasions. These rails it is necessary to lay "to save the lives of Canadian soldiers in France and Flanders. Those are facts that cannot possibly be controverted. You ask me why the abnormal number of four turnouts to the mile are required, and I have to say to you only this: I have been told by engineers of eminence now in France who have come here and gone back that a heavy rail is necessary properly to anchor the heavy artillery at a given point to shell the enemy. The heavy artillery requires the heaviest pos-

sible kind of rail, and those rails necessarily require the heavy turnouts, which, as hon. gentlemen know, are merely little break-ings-off or turnings-out from the main line. Four turnouts to the mile are required in order that our gallant railway construction corps in France-working under conditions such as men have never worked under be-, fore; at night, with very little light, the shells of the enemy falling everywhere about them-may be able to provide for the proper anchoring of guns that weigh eighty tons and for the sending within the next hour of shells into the enemy's lines. In view of these facts, I am sure the House will have an adequate^appreciation of why we were asked for 300 miles of rails and 1,200 turnouts.


William Pugsley: By turnouts, does the
hon. gentleman mean what we call sidings?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Not sidings. Sometimes they are called sidings in this country, but I have called them turnouts or ' switches. From the line extending towards the German front a short line of rail is laid-sometimes a quarter of a mile in length; sometimes half a mile. Heavy rails and adequate turnouts are nectessary in order that the cars upon which are mounted guns weighing in some cases as much as eighty tons may be firmly held and shells weighing sometimes a ton may be sent toward the German lines. It is hardly necessary for me to say- that the concussion-the kick, as we called it when we were boys-is very great, and that, consequently, the use of very heavy steel and the exercise of great care are necessary.
When we were asked for 300 miles of rails and 1,200 turnouts, what did we do? The Government of Canada, an integral part of the warring powers, a unit on the side of the Allies, replied: to the extent of our ability, we wiill supply these rails and turnouts. The Government did not go to the Grand Trunk Pacific, the Canadian Pacific, or the Canadian Northern. They went to the National Transcontinental railway, the property of the people of Canada, because it iwais felt, having regard to other means of communication, that the removal of rails from that line would cause the least disturbance to traffic and would be a representative loan from all the Canadian people of steel rails for this purpose. So, at various terminals and at isiwitches and .sidings, 300 miles of rails and 1,200 turnouts were taken up. These 1,200 turnouts were not all taken from the National Transcontinental; some

were acquired by purchase; some were taken from other portions of the Canadian roads. Let me explain where the difficulty comes in. A turnout is bored with regard to the rail that is used on the line. If, it was merely a matter oif laying a straight line and using 50, 60, 70, 90 or 100 pound rails, there would be no .difficulty. When I went West the Canadian Pacific Railway was laid with 56 pound rails. On some portions of the New York Central between Ottawa and New York, 90 and 112 pound rails are uped. If the line is a straight one, you can use different weights of rail as you proceed, but if the line is not straight, the turnouts are bored to match the particular kind of rail used. The rail of the weight and boring used omi our lines and the turnout adopted thereto, were those that this Government, in response to the request of our Allies, .procured by taking up portions of the National Trancontinental and by purchase.
It is quite true, as the member for Edmonton has said, that all of these rails are not in France. Would to God they were! We should all be glad if they were-.but they are not. The German submarine is upon the high seas; transport is becoming very difficult. We have not been able to ship all those rails to France, but, to the extent of the ability of the merchant marine of England and France to carry them, these rails have been .shipped to France and some of them that were taken from the Transcontinental line, together with the turnouts that were provided, are to-dtay making it passible for our artillery to hurl shells into the German lines.


Frank Oliver: Perhaps the hon. gentleman will give us the information that the Minister of Railways refused to give, and will tell us how many rails have gone to France.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It has been thought advisable in war that those charged with high responsibility should not disclose all they know. I do not pretend to know how many miles of rails have been sent or how many have reached France. All I know is that some have reached France, and I am sure, knowing the hon. memlber for Edmonton as I do, that he, for one, will rejoice that that is a fact.


Frank Oliver: The old story-the censorship to protect incompetence and ignorance.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Then it has been largely in use by my hon. friend during the most of
his life. In the light of those facts, concerning which there need be no controversy, I am sure that many a gentleman on the other side of the House is proud that we have been able to supply the rails. I do not think that we should have any acrimonious contention concerning matters of this kind. Why should we? If I read aright the countenances of hon. .gentlemen opposite, I do not think they are rejoicing in the fact that we .had to talse up rails. I feel that they, like myself, deprecate the fact that we are in the midst of a great war. But I am sure most of them believe, as I do, that the welfare of this State and our civilization are threatened. If, therefore, we can do this little bit to save our boys at the front and make it possible for them to become more effective, why in the name of Heaven should we not do it? Why in the name of Heaven should we not rejoice in doing it? Does any man. in this . House believe that we should not do it?
Having supplied 300 miles of rails and 1,200 turnouts, we were asked for further quantities of the same kind of rail and turnout. There was just one source from which that class of rail with the particular bore required could be obtained, and that was on the Grand Trunk Pacific. There were some, it is true, on the Hudson Bay railway, but they had not the adequate turnouts. So we went West. I was interested in this matter because I received telegrams from gentlemen asking me to look into it. The minister, unlike some of my hon. friends, did not arrogate- to himself a knowledge which he said he did not possess. He said: I leave this matter to engineers who know much more than I. He said to them: Gentlemen, I want you to go West; I want you, undqr the direction of the Chief Railway Commissioner of Canada, who has knowledge of the traffic conditions, to determine how we can best serve our people overseas and at the same time do the least injury to traffic conditions in Canada. The judgment of engineers such as those who dealt with this matter is entitled to much consideration. They went to the Grand Trunk Pacific and they looked the situation over. They found that they could take up the rails to which my hon. friend has referred, and that 600 additional turnouts could be Obtained, making a total of 1,800 turnouts, or switches, and 600 miles of track. And what happened? The rails on the Grand Trunk Pacific are being taken up. Rails are being torn up from the Canadian Northern grades and shifted over to


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Order. The hon. member is exceeding the rules of debate.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am asking the question.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: It is not in order for the hon. member to say, by indirect methods, what he cannot say directly.


William Pugsley: I think my hon. friend knows a little better than to say what he has said.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I will put it in this way. Can anything be more tragic than that any member of this House should speak about the rights of bondholders, when the British Government and the Canadian Government have put the collective credit and weight of the resources of the British Empire behind 300 miles of track? That is really what this means. In the midst of a great struggle, we have on the one hand a few bondholders interested in 300 miles of track, and on the other, the combined

resources of the British Empire to make good the damages, the making good of which is guaranteed by this Dominion, and by the obligations, not only of Great Britain, but of France. Such a condition of affairs simply beggars description. I cannot keep myself within the rules of order and adequately describe it.
Mr. PiUGSLEY: Then the hon. member had better sit down.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have no doubt my hon. friend would like me to do so.


William Pugsley: No, I like to see the hon.
member on his feet.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Nothing more remains to be said in relation to the question except one observation in regard to the collieries. The collieries have not been put out of business; it is not proposed to put them out of business, and it has not been suggested that they will be put out of business. The cold facts are that the lay-out has been arranged so that the collieries may continue to be served, and, as I have said, my assurance is that unless that could be done the rails would not be moved. I still think that the rights of the citizens of Alberta can be protected without any violent attack being made against individuals, who, at tht moment, happen to occupy a place of responsibility under the Crown. I still believe that the interests of the Dominion of Canada are, at this moment, so inextricably involved with those of Great Britain and France that any service that we can render, however small or insignificant it may apparently be, involving merely the moving of a few miles of rails and a few hundred turnouts, should be done so gladly, so willingly, that in no Parliament that I can conceive of within the Empire would a thoughtful, responsible member of Parliament take up the time that might well be otherwise used in finding fault with the patriotic and willing service that is being rendered by the Government that happens, for the time being, to be placed in the position where it can respond to the reasonable demands that are made upon it by those who are directing military operations overseas?
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (South Renfrew) : Mr. Speaker, the words of the chief of the National Service Board strike us with a great lack of harmony. He chastises members of the House for wasting its time in useless talk, but a good portion of his time was taken up in backing in and out of the rules of order of the House. He could not, in this time of stress, keep within the
rules of debate, in referring to an hon. member on this side of the House who dared to discuss this question. As a member of this House, I am becoming heartily sick of the way in which every time a member on this side discusses any question, some hon. member on the opposite side challenges his loyalty, directly or indirectly.


An hon. MEMBER:: Disgusting.


Mr. GRAHAM:: My hon. friend, the Chief of the National Service Board-


William Pugsley: What board is that?


George Perry Graham: The late lamented
National Service Board. My hon. friend (Mr. Bennett) has no right to lecture us on what is being done in connection with this war. We understand our responsibilities, and we are not going to he frightened from exercising our Tights even by the imperious manner of the hon. member for Calgary. He says that we are all interested in the war. So we are, and for my part whatever is best for winning the war I am prepared to support. That is my way of thinking, but there is one thing that is not in the interest of this war, and that is the giving of lectures like the one to which we have just listened.	'
We should not boast of what we have done to win the war, for .none of us has done too much, and none of us can do too much. I was particularly pained at a reference of the Minister of Railways to my hon. friend for Edmonton, for if there is a man in Canada who has done his duty in this war it is my hon. friend who sits to my left (Mr. Oliver). He is represented today by a living presence in the trenches, and he is also represented in a grave in France, and when he rises to discuss a question of this kind he does so because he feels It is in the interests of the people he represents. He has a perfect right to do so, and if sacrifice be the measure of that right he has the right to as full an extent as any man in Canada. We are not helping the cause by flinging these aspersions across the floor of the House about disloy alty. I take it for granted that the heart of the people of Canada beats true to the great cause in which we are engaged, and so long as we are actuated by that spirit let us talk like reasonable men, and not criticise each other as if disloyalty lurked in the breast of any one. The Canadian people are true to this great cause. However we may differ on other things, we stand united for the winning of the war, and we

will not rest until that purpose has been accomplished.
Now what is this question over which the Government and the sub-Government have lest their temper? It is as to whether the rails should have been taken up in one particular part of Canada and from one particular railway. No hon. gentleman has suggested for a moment, and I should be ashamed of him if he did, that we should not hasten to comply with the request of the British Government for rails that were necessary to the winning of the war. The question of bringing up the heavy artillery is one we do not understand so well as those who have been to the front, but we are told that it is of vital importance, and 1 am sure that the history of the war during the last few weeks must have convinced us beyond all cavil, that a great deal of our success depends upon the use of heavy artillery. We all want to do our share, but are we doing it in the right way? I am not going to criticise the Minister of Railways unfairly, but this fact does undoubtedly stand out: the people of Canada are suspicious, and with some cause, that this Government has never attempted to make a success of the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Transcontinental, and when the minister at first blush and without consultation, so far as we know, rushed to that system for the rails that were required, the people began to suspect that that was tantamount to saying the system was no good. My hon. friend from Calgary (Mr. Bennett) says that the rails were of little, use because the road had carried practically no war supplies, and that is one thing I am going to charge against the Government when the proper time comes. Having a railway of our own to carry supplies, running through Canadian territory from the Pacific to the Atlantic, the Government refused to use the road for the transport of supplies for the front, but gave the traffic to the other lines. The hon member for Calgary has told me in advance that I am right in that regard.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I hope my hon. friend followed me. I said that the sections which were affected by the tearing up of these rails were not carrying supplies for the front or munitions of war. I think there are three passenger trains running.


George Perry Graham: I admit one thing, that I am following my hon. friend. He again admits that this traffic in war supplies was given to other lines. When the Government were asked for rails, they went at once tr
flVIr. Graham.)
the Transcontinental. Now if, as they intimate, that road was of little use before, they made it of still less use by taking up the sidings. I am not going to say that the Government did wrong; I want to be fait in my criticism, and I would criticise nothing that I thought made for efficiency in the winning of the war. But the long railway address of my hon. friend from Calgary as to the turnouts did not impress me. He says that the Transcontinental sidings did not have the number of turnouts to the mile that were necessary. My hon. friend is right as to the turnout itself, but you can take any rail and have a turnout to fit that rail. The moment the turnout is made, rails of any quality of steel or weight can be adjusted, the only change involved being at one joint.


Richard Bedford Bennett: They asked for these rails.


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend's argument as to turnouts was therefore no argument at all, so far as railway construction is concerned. His next point was that the British Government asked for rails with the same boring. I am not going to quarrel with that statement, though as a humble citizen I might be allowed to say that the fact of the British Government asking for a particular thing is not absolute proof that it is the proper thing to do under the circumstances, because they have changed their mind on several matters. It is therefore not a sine qua non that it is always right to leave it to the British Government. Why did they ask for these rails? It was for one of two reasons: either they were easier of construction and could be laid more quickly and with greater safety under fire. Now, I have not heard any one say there is any great difference between the time consumed in laying the Grand Trunk Pacific rails and rails of another pattern. The borings and the fishplates are of a different style.


Francis Cochrane: The bolts are different.


George Perry Graham: A different boring would include a different bolt, of course.


Francis Cochrane: By using these rails there was less liability of a mix-up.


George Perry Graham: I know the two styles of rails pretty well and I have not been told by any one that there is any great difference in the time it takes to lay them. . If General Stewart tells me that he can lay these rails more quickly and with greater safety under fire than rails of the other

kind, I will say at once that these rails ought to be sent, but I do not take any stock myself in that argument.
As to the paralleling of tracks, the hon. member for Calgary points out that the colliery is going to be looked after, and he chastised us severely for suggesting that we should look after the coal mine in preference to the war. My hon. friend shakes his head; somebody said that, and I think it was the minister. At all events the hon. member for Calgary admits that he looked after the coal mine first, and after that, he did the patriotic thing.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I do not know
anything about the colliery except that I received a telegram from some one interested in it. I have no interest in it myself of any kind.


George Perry Graham: I was not suggesting that my hon. friend was financially interested in it. But he first investigated as to whether this colliery of has friends would he injured or not, and, finding that it would not be injured-" A'll right, take up the rails." But here is the position:	If the
colliery on one side of the lake is to be looked after by taking up the Canadian Northern rails and placing them where the Grand Trunk Pacific rails are now, the colliery on the other side will be robbed of its transportation facilities. You cannot serve the two. I have been on that ground, and I know.


Richard Bedford Bennett: My information
i>s that all the collieries will be looked after.


George Perry Graham: Then it can only he by
taking up the rails and laying them down again in the same place. I have been on that ground within a month and a half, and I say that if the rails are taken from the Grand 'Trunk Pacific on one side of the lake, and replaced by rails taken from the Canadian Northern on the other side of the lake, the collieries on the side now being served by the Canadian Northern will have no transportation facilities. You cannot have the rails and not have them at the same time. My hon. friend from Edmonton (Mr. Oliver) is interested


Francis Cochrane: But I tell him that
in a day or two I will have a map here-


George Perry Graham: But you can't draw coal on a map.


Francis Cochrane: You can draw rails
on a map.


George Perry Graham: The question has been
raised why these collieries should .object, as they are not going to be injured. But the hon. member for Edmonton has telegram after telegram to the effect tlhat they are going to be injured. It is his duty, then, to raise the question. He would he doing less than his duty if he did not urge the minister to the fullest extent of his power to see if it is not possible, without interfering with the efficiency of carrying on the war, to avoid impairing the industries of the western country, particularly those engaged in the production of coal.
And now, let me say this as my closing word: Let us discuss these questions with one single eye to the winning of the war- that is the first thing, of course. But when an hon. member on this side of the House, who has done what the hon. member for Edmonton has done, raises such a question as has been raised here to-day, it ill becomes any member to insinuate that he is impelled or inspired by any other than the highest
5 p.m. motives. We want to accomplish what is before us, hut we shall never accomplish it if we distrust one another in the matter of loyalty. We have our own ideas, and to these ideas w^ hold strongly; hut for Heaven's sake, in discussing these matters upon which we are supposed to be united, let us stop accusing one another, on trifling provocation, of not showing as much loyalty on one side of this House as on the other.
Motion negatived.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Blain in the Chair.
Civil Government-Department of Trade and Commerce, Salaries, $133,700.
William Pugsley: Will the minister give
us some information as to the Commissioner of Trade and Commerce whose salary is provided for in this Estimate. I do not know that any statement that has been made in the House as to this gentleman. Who is he, how long has he been in the service, and what are his duties?


George Eulas Foster: First let me say with regard to this, item that there is no increase in the number of officials; the increase in the amount asked for as compared with last year is due wholly to the regular statutory increases. It will be remembered that Mt. Richard Grigg, who was Commissioner of Trade and Commerce, died very

suddenly about a year and a half ago. His loss, of course was very much felt by the department. Under the confused conditions of trade and commerce I have not felt in a position to make a new appointment, and am not quite sure whether I shall fill the position with an officer performing exactly the same duties as Mr. Grigg performed. But there will he an appointment of a man of superior class who will take over perhaps more extended and slightly different duties, in view of the reconstruction period that is upon us,


John Gillanders Turriff: Does the minister think it tends to the smooth working of a department to put men under the deputy minister with higher salaries than that paid to the deputy, who is the operating head of the department? I know that this has been the practice in some cases under the late Government, as well as under their present succesisors, 'but it always seemed to me a mistake.


George Eulas Foster: It does not seem to be fair that you should pin down the department, no matter what its possibilities or necessities were in the light of the service required, or that if you find a technical, or scientific, officer, some one who is required for a very special purpose, you shall be debarred from getting his services simply because you do not want to exceed the salary which is given for a deputy minister. If you took that position and made a hard and fast rule you would bar the possibility of securing the best service in certain particulars.


Mr. KNOWLES:: I would like to make a proposition to the hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce. I will not exact an answer to-day, but I will make the proposition. I have a Bill before the House, No. 22, which 'affects the minister's department in connection with the indemnity to be granted to workmen who are injured while in the employ of the Government in terminal elevators in the West. The minister is familiar with that question. Unfortunately, labourers or employees of any kind, who are in the employ of the Government in the elevators at Moosejaw, Saskatoon, or other places, on being injured, have no claim under the Workmen's Compensation Act. Employees of His Majesty should not be in an inferior position to that of employees in any other elevator. This matter has already been the subject of discussion. I doubt if my Bill will be reached. We have allowed the minister's estimates to go through pretty easily, and perhaps he will tell us if he
CSir George Foster.]
would take the matter into consideration so that we might have the Bill discussed this session.


George Eulas Foster: I have not really seen my hon. friend's Bill yet. Has the Bill been printed?


William Erskine Knowles: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: I have not looked into it, but I will be very glad to do so and let my hon. friend know.


John Gillanders Turriff: Some time ago I asked the minister if it was his intention to introduce a Bill to amend the Manitoba Grain Act, and my hon. friend told me that he expected to. I have been waiting for the introduction of the Bill. I wish to propose some amendments to .the Manitoba Grain Act. I would like to have an assurance from my hon. friend that he is going to bring in a Bill to amend the Act; otherwise, I shall have to bring in a Bill myself to amend it and I would rather not do that.


George Eulas Foster: I am afraid that I cannot give my hon. friend (Mr. Turriff ) any more definite information than I did before and that was that I did expect to bring in a Bill. I am having very closely canvassed now certain representations that have been made in reference to the amendment of the Act. I may say with reference to amendments that the number proposed has been legion but not very many have survived the investigation that has been put upon them and these are not at present being pressed, but there are some three or four that I have had called to my attention and which are now receiving the consideration of the Grain Board. As soon as I receive the report from them I will be able to indicate what the proposed amendments are, if any. If it is possible at all to do without amending the Act this year I should be very glad.


Mr. MURPHY:: When my hon. friend was discussing the Estimates, did he state to the committee who had been appointed to succeed the late Mr. Grigg.


George Eulas Foster: No appointment.
Ocean and River Service.-Maintenance and Repairs to Dominion Steamers and Ice Breakers, $1,180,000.


John Douglas Hazen: The appropriations for
1916-17 in this department were $6,355,998. The Estimates for the present year that I am submitting now are $4,894,792, there being a reduction of $1,461,206. The de-

creases and increases in the Department of Marine and Fisheries are as follows:
Service.	Increase. Decrease.
Ocean and River Service..	$	11,000
Public Works, chargeable
to capital	 1,247,165
Lighthouse and coast ser
vice	 205,700
Marine Hospitals	 5,000
Scientific institutions-meteorological service..	.. $7,080
Steamboat inspection.. ..	579
$7,659	$1,468,867
Total decrease	$1,461,206


William Pugsley: These are the figures in the Estimates. Will the minister tell us what the figures are as compared with the actual expenditure?


John Douglas Hazen: These are the figures as compared with the total of the Estimates of last year.


William Pugsley: How do they compare with the expenditure?


John Douglas Hazen: I think I had better explain that item by item. I will give the committee the exact expenditure last year in every case. The first item we have under consideration is
Maintenance and repairs to Dominion steamers and ice breakers, $1,180,000.
The amount asked is the same as last year. The expenditure in 1915-16 was $1,124,708.21 and in 1916-17 we kept the expenditure down to $962,048.48. We are asking for the same appropriation as last year, although I hope to be able to keep the expenditure below the appropriation by nearly $200,000.


William Pugsley: Does the minister not think that he might set a good example by reducing the Estimates to the actual amount that he thinks he will spend?


John Douglas Hazen: The officials of the depart->ment, those who are at the head of the different branches and charged very largely with the responsibility, subject, of course, to the minister's responsibility, do not like the Estimates to be cut down to the last dollar. They think it is wiser to have something to come and go upon and that seems to have been the policy that has usually prevailed in this House in connection with the Estimates.
In connection with this vote, for instance, there may be some unforeseen occurrence with seme of the steamers that might require a considerable expenditure which we do not anticipate at the present time, and
then if we had not a sufficient vote we would have to get a Governor General's warrant. In addition to that, we know that this year we will have to pay higher prices for coal, oil, paints and things of that sort for use on the steamers, as the prices of all of these commodities have advanced.


John Howard Sinclair: Is any part of this expenditure chargeable to the war vote?


John Douglas Hazen: No. There is no expenditure under the Marine and Fisheries Department chargeable to that vote, although, of course, there is a large expenditure in the Department of the Naval Service which is chargeable to the war vote.


Mr. MAROIL:: Have you the same number of icebreakers as you had three or four years ago?	'


John Douglas Hazen: The Earl Grey and the
Minto, which were used in the service between Prince Edward Island and the mainland, have been disposed of to the Russian Government. Of course, we expect that by next winter the service formerly rendered by these steamers will be performed by the car ferry, as the piers on each side of the strait are nearing completion. Then that service will pass from the control of the Marine and Fisheries Department to that of the Department of Railways and Canals.


Charles Marcil: Then they have not been replaced?


John Douglas Hazen: They will not be replaced at present.


Charles Marcil: Were the results of the
icebreaking operations on the St. Lawrence this year satisfactory?


John Douglas Hazen: They have been about the same as in other years, and I think the results have been fairly good. I do not know that there has been any flooding of low lands, and I think that the icebreaking has caused navigation to Montreal to open at an earlier date than it otherwise would have opened.
Ocean and river service, examiners of masters and mates $16,500.


John Douglas Hazen: This is the same amount as last year. The expenditure for 1915-16 was $13,857.63, and for the year ending 31st March last, $12,880. Of course it is likeiy that some accounts will have come in since that date which will be charged back to the year in which they were incurred, so that the amount will probably be about the

same as in the preceding year. The number of certificates granted was as follows: Seagoing certificates, 13 masters and 67 mates; coasting certificates, 115 masters and 35 mates; inland and minor waters, 131 masters and 67 mates.


William Pugsley: What is the average salary paid?


John Douglas Hazen: Most of them are not large, and those who receive good salaries also, discharge other duties. For instance, Captain Malcolm at Halifax gets $1,800. P. L. Lachance, at Quebec, gets the same amount. Alexander Cameron, at Charlottetown, gets $600. The gentleman at Vancouver gets $1,800. The others run from $200 to $600.


John Howard Sinclair: They have nothing to do with the teaching?


John Douglas Hazen: No, that is a different staff.
Ocean and river service, investigation into wrecks, $12,300.


John Douglas Hazen: That varies with the number of wrecks. The year before last, the cost was $12,241, and last year, $4,807. It will be rather gratifying to the House to know that last year, for the first time in 63 years, there was not a casualty between Quebec and Father Point. The wreck commissioner is Captain Demers, a permanent official of the department and a member of the Civil Service. We have also a wreck commissioner on the Pacific coast who receives $1,500. It was found that to have Captain Demers go to the Pacific coast every time there was a wreck there involved great loss of time and also a good deal of expense.


Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:: I think that Captain Demers is a very satisfactory officer indeed, and, so far as I know, he discharges his duties fearlessly and impartially. The custom of having assessors in inquiries is a long and well-established one. I think, however, that the chief examiner, in this case, Mr. Demers, should have absolute and full authority to select his own assessors. In Halifax, where many inquiries take place, it has become the practice of members of political patronage committees to insist upon the appointment of the assessors.


John Douglas Hazen: They have no business to.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think that political patronage should be absolutely eliminated in matters of this kind. A better practice would be to allow the examiner to select his own assessor; no outside persons at

points where inquiries are instituted should be consulted as to assistants or asked to recommend them. I know of one or two' instances where men who were not qualified were appointed assessors. I am glad that the minister does not approve of that practice; I hope that he will do everything in His power to prevent its recurrence. The investigation of wrecks is a very important matter. The responsibility of the chief commissioner is very great; the future of captains and officers of the ships involved in any disaster .is at stake. The commissioner should have the assistance' of strong, independent and impartial men; he, therefore, would be the better person to select his assessors.


John Douglas Hazen: I entirely concur in what my hon. friend has said. The wreck commissioner's court should be entirely free from any political interference. My attention was directed, within the last year or so, to the fact that in certain places suggestions were being made to the wreck commissioner that certain persons should be appointed. I at once gave instructions to my deputy that the wreck commissioner dhould exercise his own judgment in every case; that he should appoint men whom he thought qualified to act as assessors.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That should be communicated to the wreck commissioner.


John Douglas Hazen: It has been communicated to him. When Mr. Demers is called, say, to some part of the Maritime Provinces to hold an inquiry, orders are issued, signed by myself, for the holding of the inquiry and for the appointment of assessors, the latter in blank. Mr. Demers, when he reaches the place of investigation, selects the best men he can find to act as assessors, and fills in the names on the order for the appointment of assessors. There is absolutely no interference with the authority of the wreck commissioner in regard to the matter. .
Ocean and river service-Expenses of schools of navigation, $3,000.


John Howard Sinclair: Will the minister state what is being done in connection with the schools of navigation?


John Douglas Hazen: There is no change in the estimate from that of previous years. The amount spent last year up to March 31 under this head was $4,461, and in the previous year $4,067. The item is to cover all expenditures in connection with the de-

partment's free navigation schools for the fiscal year 1917-18. Free navigation schools are now in operation as follows: For the whole year, at Halifax, N.S., Captain John Simmons, instructor, $80 a month, and at St. John, N.B., Captain R. C. Cole, $75 a month. For the winter months only, at Quebec, P.Q., Captain P. L. Lachance, instructor, $600 per annum; North Sydney, N.S., Captain James Sutherland, $250 per season; Yarmouth, N.S., Captain J. E. Murphy, $250 per season; Charlottetown, P.E.I., Captain James Lumsdane, $75 a month; Collingwood, Ont., Captain George C. Coles, $250 a season; Kingston, Ont., Captain Steeves, paid by Queen's University; Vancouver, B.C. , Captain Charles Eddie, salary covered by yearly salary as examiner of masters and mate3. We pay Queen's University $500 for the season. The university employs a competent professor, gives free instruction, provides class rooms, and pays all expenses. At Vancouver, Captain Charles Eddie receives no salary as instructor, his remuneration being covered by the yearly salary paid him as examiner of masters and mates. The school at Charlottetown is a new school, opened in December last. There was a very general demand for a school in Prince Edward Island, which has turned out a great many sailors.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Was the school there a success?


John Douglas Hazen: Last year three certificates were granted to masters of coasting vessels, four to mates of coasting vessels, and one to a master of inland and minor waters. Not many certificates were granted, but, perhaps, better results will 'be obtained when the school has been longer in operation. If not, we shall have to consider the desirability of continuing the school. At the suggestion of the hon. member for Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil), a school of navigation was established at Baie des Chaleurs, and the work was attended with some degree of success. Unfortunately, however, the gentleman who had been conducting it went away and we could not get any one else in the community who had the necessary knowledge to continue the school.


Charles Marcil: Would the hon. gentleman continue it this year if an1 instructor to carry on the work were obtained?


John Douglas Hazen: If the results of the experiment justified it, certainly we should be prepared to continue the school.


Mr. CARROLL:: The minister referred
to the fact that in Vancouver one gentleman acts as examiner of mates and instructor in the school of navigation. I think that that would not be a good system to follow definitely.


John Douglas Hazen: The hon. gentleman is quite right. That is the only case of the kind. I do not think it is desirable that the practice should 'Continue, and we are making arrangements to discontinue it.


John Howard Sinclair: I regret that the minister has not taken this matter up with a little more vigour. The matter of enabling our young imen to secure navigation licenses not only in 'Halifax and Charlottetown, but in the towns on the coast of the Maritime Provinces, on the Great Lakes and on the Pacific, !is a matter of considerable importance. The question of doing something in connection with the technical school at Halifax was brought to my hon. friend's attention on several occasions, but he does not seem to have made any progress in that regard. We have an excellent technical school in Halifax and we have branches in various parts of the province where men qualify themselves in the coal mining and steel industries. In the town in which I live a large number of young boyis, many of them apprentices in the steel works, receive training at nights in the technical schools which are affiliated with the Provincial Technical School at Halifax. There is no reason why in the larger Maritime coast towns some system should not be established by which the young men should learn to build boats, handle and repair gasolene engines and obtain navigation licenses.
This question of technical education is, of course, a big one; but so far as the maritime industries of this country are con-eernfecf, I think it could be developed by my hon. friend without very much expense. It is absurd to think that we are spending in the whole of Canada only $4,000 a year in educating our young men for maritime service. The fact is that they have to pick up their education elsewhere as it is not provided by the Government, and even in the city of Halifax where there is a school of navigation, there are private enterprises receiving no assistance from the Government where men are training boys to pass marine examinations. The same thing is occurring in other places throughout the country, so that what we are doing is not effective, and I wish the minister would take the matter up in a

bigger way and, either in conjunction with the technical schools or otherwise, would give the young men in the towns along the coast an opportunity of receiving lessons in marine matters. That would be a great advantage to the country, because if we are going to build up a mercantile marine we must have sailors and officers. No later than to-day I received a letter from a gentleman in the province of Ontario stating that it was impossible for him to secure officers for an ocean-going ship. Officers are scarce; they are more difficult to secure now, I suppose, than they ever were before, so that we should be doing something in the way of training officers, and if the minister could think of any scheme whereby this opportunity would be given to young men of Canso, Shelburne, Liverpool, Lunenburg and other places that I might mention on the coast of the Maritime Provinces, it would be of great advantage to the young men of those localities and would enable them to get so far ahead with their studies that they could pass the examinations without going to Halifax or Charlottetown or any of those places to attend school. It is out of the question for a large number of those men who are not wealthy to go away from home in order to attend school at Halifax or any of those other places, and education of that kind should be brought to their doors by some method. That is the question with which I would like my hon. friend to deal.


John Douglas Hazen: In regard to what my hon. friend said in the first instance, I may say that at Halifax this work is going on in conjunction with the technical school. Mr. Simmons there is employed with the approval of the officers of the technical school, and the work is done in the technical college itself, so that we are in harmony with them and co-operating with them in regard to this matter.
My hon. friend says that there should be some general policy in regard to technical education. There is a certain constitutional difficulty in this country in regard to technical education. Education is, of course, assigned, under the British North America Act, to the provinces, and there is no doubt that there are certain provinces of Canada which are very jealous of their rights, and when communications were addressed to them on the subject by a previous Government, they gave their views with regard to the matter and were not prepared to say whether they would favour a Federal

Government coming into the field of technical education. I think, however, that is a matter that should be disposed of, if possible, by mutual compromise, and I hope some day to see this country embarking on a large scale on a scheme of technical education, because I believe it would be of enormous advantage to the country from many standpoints, and I do not think any . country can become great industrially unless it has a proper system of technical education. I think, however, a great deal of that work can be done by the provincial schools. The technical school at Halifax is a step forward in the right direction, and I understand there is at Toronto a school that is maintained by the city or municipality, and that is also a step forward. But the time will come when the question will have to be dealt with in a large way, and there will have to be a very large expenditure made in regard to it. I do not think it is desirable to have small technical schools scattered here and there throughout the country, but some broad policy will have to be adopted in the future. There has already been a good deal of discussion in this country in regard to this question, and a commission which was appointed' has sent in a very interesting report. I refer to the commission of which Mr. James Robertson was the chairman.
I have no doubt if conditions were normal, that report would have been considered and probably the question would have been dealt with, but at present, of course, it is not easy to consider such large expenditures as would be necessary in order to deal with the question in a broad manner.


John Howard Sinclair: Is the minister satisfied that nothing could be done through the technical school at Halifax?


John Douglas Hazen: The technical school at Halifax, from what I am told, is a very excellent institution, and perhaps something could be done; but it is a school,
I understand, absolutely controlled by the provincial government, and as I have stated, under the British North America Act, the local Governments are charged with the duty of education. In this matter, we have co-operated with them just as we have done with Queen's University at Kingston where we have made a very excellent arrangement. As technical education is undoubtedly of great importance to the country, I have no doubt that when conditions become normal, the matter will have to be dealt with in a large way.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Has the minister asked the directors of the technical college at Halifax to develop some public interest in this phase of education? I know it is a very difficult problem, and I am sorry to say it is too true that there appears to be a much lesser interest on the part of young men to secure certificates of competency than there was twenty-five or thirty years ago. The mariners who occupy the high positions do not seem to be as well qualified as were the men of many years past, and that is rather strange, because there is a large demand for men and splendid positions are open for those who will qualify. I do not pretend to be able to give to the minister the solution of the problem. I know in my own province there should be. hundreds of men willing to qualify for marine service, but the truth is that very few have any desire to do so. My hon. friend from Guysborough (Mr. Sinclair) has been for a long time developing the theory of establishing a number of small schools, thinking numbers might be induced in that way to qualify. I have always expressed a doubt; I think in a province like Nova Scotia, if there was one big school, then notwithstanding the expense you would probably have a very large attendance, and the association of seafaring men with one another in numbers is an incentive to proficiency and efficiency. I admit, however, there is a great deal in the position taken by the hon. member for Guysborough. This is an important matter and the minister need not be alarmed at interfering because education is a provincial matter. After all, this is more a Dominion matter than a provincial one. It relates to trade and commerce. I do not think a marine education would come under the heading of education in the British North America Act. If the minister would entrust the Director of the Technical College at Halifax with the responsibility of starting and carrying on a propaganda in the Maritime Provinces for the purpose of encouraging young men to qualify for the marine service, I think he would be more likely to achieve success than by any other means. I think the Technical College at Halifax is the most efficient in the Dominion. I know that Mr. Sexton, the director, is a highly skilled and efficient man, and very greatly interested in his work. I am sure he would carry out the work zealously and intelligently, and I think he might achieve some success.


John Howard Sinclair: I do not want the minister to think we are talking merely for a pastime, because we are really very much in earnest. I think this work could be done without much expense. The same work is being done successfully and with very little expense in connection with the coal mining industry. There are local schools in all the mining towns in Nova Scotia where young men can attend in the evening and qualify for positions of foremen, etc. By arrangement with the local authorities, the high schools are used for the purpose. No rental is paid, and I believe that a great many of the men who are teaching the scientific branches of the steel and coal industry are giving their services free. This form of education would be of immense advantage to the people in the larger towns in the province of Nova Scotia, and I hope the minister will get the Director of the Technical College at Halifax to work out a scheme in co-operation1 with the high schools of the province. That would be a first step. If the scheme were not satisfactory the minister could turn it down, but I think Mr. Sexton will be able to devise some scheme which could be worked at least along the coast of Nova Scotia. Will the minister do this?


John Douglas Hazen: I will give every consideration to what my hon. friend says.
Removal of obstructions in navigable waters, $20,000.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: How much is being spend on this item?


John Douglas Hazen: Our expenditure for the year ending March 31 last was $1,870. We have to have this item in the Estimates, because a large steamer might get wrecked at any time in an important channel, and the owners might be unable to remove it; in that case the department would remove it, and make the owners pay afterwards.
Inspection of live stock shipments, $5,000.


Mr. NESBITT:: Will the minister explain this item?


John Douglas Hazen: Our department is responsible for seeing that proper accommodation is provided on board ship for live animals. At one time we had inspectors at different ports throughout the country, but there has been such a small shipment of livestock of late years that these inspectors have been withdrawn, and the vote is accordingly very much decreased. Our expenditure last year was $2,401, and this was mostly spent at

Montreal in connection with the shipment of horses.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Was that amount paid to inspectors?


John Douglas Hazen: Part of it. Mr. Delorme, inspector at Montreal, receives an annual salary of $1,200; $300 was spent for office' rent, and there were miscellaneous expenses. Mr. Delorme sees that proper accommodation is provided.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: What about the port of St. John?


John Douglas Hazen: There is practically no livestock shipped from St. John.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Lots of horses have been shipped from there.


John Douglas Hazen: They were for war purposes and were looked after by Captain Lindsay, a paid official loaned to the Militia Department by the Marine Department. Captain Lindsay is superintendent of pilots on the St. Lawrence river.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: He does not come in your estimates?


John Douglas Hazen: No.


John Howard Sinclair: Has the cattle trade died out altogether?


John Douglas Hazen: This matter was taken up when we were in England with Mr. Pro-thero, the head of the Agricultural Department. Only a few days ago he stated in the House of Commons that there is no justification for excluding Canadian live cattle on the ground of disease.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: That refers to stockers.
A great many cattle are shipped over there to be slaughtered on arrival.


John Douglas Hazen: Yes. Formerly, cattle used to be sent over and fattened in England. That was stopped by the Department of Agriculture, on the ground that there was disease among Canadian cattle. It has been proved time and again that there was no disease among Canadian cattle, that there was less disease among Canadian herds than among British herds. Mr. Prothero told us that there was no justification whatever for excluding Canadian cattle on the ground of disease.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: The statement he made in the House of Commons a few days ago was published in the press.


John Douglas Hazen: Yes. There is no doubt that the exclusion of Canadian cattle was 
largely a measure of protection for the stock raisers and breeders of Great Britain.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Mr. Prothero practically *admits that.


John Douglas Hazen: Whether they will exclude our cattle as a measure of protection for their own stock raisers I do not know, but the stigma on our herds has been entirely removed, and I presume it will be followed by the removal of the embargo.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: I take it for granted
that not many cattle are shipped, as the law calls for them to be slaughtered on landing.
Mr. HA-ZEN: Very few in the last year, I think.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think this is
a very proper expenditure for the Department of Agriculture, but it is so small as to make one fear'that the inspection is a very careless one.


John Douglas Hazen: Oh, no.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: There should be a very rigid inspection in a matter of this kind.


John Douglas Hazen: The inspector goes very
carefully through the boat, inspects the conditions provided for the animals, what arrangements are made for a proper supply of water, and so on.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Is there any control over him, or' is it the case of a man who simply draws a salary, with nobody in the Government service to know or care whether he performs his duties or not?


John Douglas Hazen: He always reports to the department.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: What does the
department do to satisfy itself that his inspection is a proper one?
Mr. HAZElN:	I think the inspeotdom at
Montreal must be very strict, for we have had complaints from the steamship company that this man is too exacting.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I am glad to hear that.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: At the port of North
Sydney a good many cattle are shipped that come by the Intercolonial. I suppose the inspector at Montreal would have nothing to do with these shipments. What care is taken by the Government that these animals shall be properly looked after pending their shipment on the steamer? Sometimes

these cattle come in the (latter part of M.arc'h or April when the weather is stilil vea-y eold. They are taken from the cars, hut may have to wait a day or two before being put on shipboard. I know that people interested in the protection of dumb animals are much concerned to see that these cattle are not neglected. I presume that the accommodation on the boat is all right, but means to care for the cattle before they are put aboard the boat should be provided.
(Mr. HAZEN:	My attention has never
been called to this matter before. This certainly would not be the duty of the inspector at Montreal, for his duty and that of the other inspectors is to see to it that there is proper accommodation for the cattle aboard the ships. I do not know who would be responsible in the case to which, the hon. gentleman refers, but I will make inquiry.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The Railway Act provides for that, I think.


John Douglas Hazen: I believe it does.
Mr. MeKENZIE: The inspector who was at North Sydney has gone to the war, and I am not aware that any officer has been appointed to replace him. Up to the time of his leaving, and for many years, inspection was carried on at North Sydney.


John Douglas Hazen: The inspector referred to was not an officer of my department. If a veterinary, he may have been an officer of the Department of Agriculture.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess.
Committee resumed at eight o'clock, Mr. Blain in the Chair.
Customs-Salaries and contingent expenses of the several ports in the Dominion, including pay for overtime of officers, notwithstanding " anything in the Civil Service Act, and temporary Customs buildings and rentals, $3,590,000.


George Perry Graham: I wish the minister
would explain about this overwork and driving through the Civil Service Act. Of course, we know that the hon. Minister of Customs (Mr. Reid) thinks little of the Civil Service Act; but, as he has practically unrestricted sway on the outside where he has thousands in the employ of the Customs who are not under the Civil Service Act, could he not give an approximate compliance with the Act as regards the remnant in the inside service? Ordinary departments, such as that of the Minister of Railways and Canals, have practically nobody in the outside service, except the employees of the Intercolonial railway which is managed as a railway and not strictly as part of the Civil Service. As all hon. members know who want to place those who cannot pass the Civil Service examination, and to find niches for friends, the minister has had a chance to appoint thousands to the outside service without reference to the Civil Service Act, which he has a right to do, but having this advantage over his colleagues who are not able to do it, has he any excuse for violating the Act with reference to the inside service? What does this mean?


John Dowsley Reid: This is not the inside service.


George Perry Graham: It says, " notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act."


John Dowsley Reid: As I understand the application of the Civil Service Act to employees of the Customs Department in the outside service


George Perry Graham: It is not like the inside service.


John Dowsley Reid: It is in this way: the Civil Service Act was passed by Parliament many years ago for the outside service, and it placed the outside customs officers under that Act. The employees in Broekville or ' Prescott are what we call outside employees. Under the Civil Service Act; if the law had been lived up to, you could not have appointed a man to a position in either of these towns unless he had passed the Civil Service examination.


George Perry Graham: He might be a temporary landing waiter or something of that kind.


John Dowsley Reid: I was going on to explain how it was done. Employees in the office are supposed to be called clerks and they have to pass an examination. The employees at the wharves or stations are called landing waiters, and they had to pass the Civil Service examination to be employed as landing waiters. That was carried on for a number of years. By the Customs Act the positions of collector of customs and preventive officer are excepted. Preventive officers were exempt, for the reason that they were employees supposed to do other work than that of clerks or landing waiters. Our secret service is under the preventive service. You might have to employ some special man and so on. Then the- Civil Service Act limited you so that you could

not employ a person over 35 years of age. You can appoint a preventive officer at any salary and any age; he is exempt. It is the same as it is under the Inland Revenue Act; certain officers there are excepted, although they are all under the Civil Service Act. I do not know whether the law was violated previous to 1896.


George Perry Graham: Previous to 1896-yes.


John Dowsley Reid: However, it does not make any difference as far as that is concerned. When there is a vacancy in the outside service- in many cases, not always-the recommendation is simply that so-and-so be appointed, and he has been appointed as a preventive officer and in many instances we have required an examination. Since I have been administering the Customs Department, the line I have taken is this-


George Perry Graham: A kind of crooked line- not straight.


John Dowsley Reid: It is a straighter line than had been followed for some time previously. I have been living as near as possible to the Civil Service Act with reference to examination in the outside service. Previous to the war I tried in almost all cases to get young men. Then, I always had an examination made by the collector or by our inspector to see if, in the opinion of the inspector or the collector, the applicant was qualified. The doctor's certificate, of course, was necessary under the Civil Service Act. That has helped us to get men who were really qualified for the positions.


John Howard Sinclair: What about the patronage committee?


John Dowsley Reid: In my county I am the patronage committee. That has been the policy I have followed and if any man passes the Civil Service examination he is promoted and given the position of clerk where the salary is higher than for a preventive officer. I think that answers my hon. friend's question.


Mr. MARCILE:: While the minister seems to be in good huimour, I would like to ask him if the time has not arrived to remedy an injustice done after the general election of 1911 on the recommendation of Mr. Tan-crede Marsil of Montreal, who was my opponent in that election?


George Perry Graham: Did the Minister of Customs accept his recommendation?


Joseph Edmond Marcile: Yes.


George Perry Graham: It is worse than I
thought.


Joseph Edmond Marcile: He dismissed a man
named H. Hamel from the position of assistant appraiser. Mr. Hamel had a salary of $1,300. He had been named a preventive officer at a salary of $1,000 a year, and a year or two afterwards he was given an increase of $200, and he remained in the same position as assistant appraiser, doing the same work as he had done before 1911, and he is doling to-day the same work as he had done for years and years. He is a good officer, he has passed the Civil Service and promotion examinations and I am sure that the Minister of Customs will be just enough to remedy the injustice that he did on the recommendation of Mr. Tancrede Marsil after the general election of 1911, now that Mr. Tancrede Marsil has returned to the old Liberal party with which he pretended to be associated, and now that he has finished with the Nationalists. I hope the minister will remember the recommendation I made to him a few years ago, will recognize that the service of Mr. Hamel is of value to the department, and will give him the position he had before.


John Dowsley Reid: While at the moment I do
not remember the circumstances of this case, I shall look up the case and if there has been any injustice it will certainly be remedied.


Joseph Edmond Marcile: The reason for the minister's action was that after the general election in 1911 Mr. Tancrede Marsil convinced the minister that Mr. Hamel had canvassed, some electors in Montreal to vote for me in Bagot. I had no electors in Montreal in 1911, and I can prove that statement at any time; the allegation was an absolute untruth. But Mr. Hamel was my brother-in-law and Mr. Tancrede Marsil recommended his dismissal as assistant appraiser apparently for that Teason. But as they needed Mr. Hamel in the department in Montreal, they made him preventive officer, and he is still in that position with the same salary.


John Dowsley Reid: Was he dismissed.?


Joseph Edmond Marcile: As assistant appraiser.


John Dowsley Reid: 
Joseph Edmond Marcile: He was dismissed as
assistant appraiser and nominated as preventive officer, but he was reduced from $1,300 to $1,000.


John Dowsley Reid: There is a Hector Hamel
drawing $1,200.


Joseph Edmond Marcile: Yes, he was given an increase of $200 about two years ago, after I had represented to the minister the injustice that had been done him.


John Dowsley Reid: I now remember my hon.
friend speaking to me, but I thought that we had at least partially remedied the grievance of which he complained. The change from the position of assistant appraiser to that of preventive officer does not necessarily mean that the official has been degraded. However, if my hon. friend ie not satisfied, I shall look into the matter again, and if any injustice has been done to Mr. Hamel I shall be glad to remedy it.


Joseph Edmond Marcile: That is all I recommend.


George Perry Graham: Will the minister say
he will not be prejudiced by any recommendation Mr. Tancrede Marsil may make?


John Dowsley Reid: I do not remember him making any.


George Perry Graham: He was the defeated
Conservative candidate, and so he would have the patronage in Montreal.


Mr. ROGERS:: As he has returned to the Liberal fold, as my hon. friend has said, of course we have no choice in the matter.
Mr, MARCILE: The so-called Liberal.


George Perry Graham: My hon. 'friend is trying to return him, but he is not deceived.


John Howard Sinclair: The preventive officer at Boyleston, in Nova Scotia, Mr. Arthur Steele, was dismissed, I think, last year. It was very convenient for people in that district to be able to register their ships without having to travel five or six miles to Guysborough to enter their vessels. Is it the intention to appoint another officer at that port?


John Dowsley Reid: Since the commencement of the war I have been reducing the staff as much as possible, and where vacancies have occurred I have not filled them unless it was absolutely necessary. The money thus saved I have used to increase the salaries of customs officials in ports where the work of the department has been increased owing to the war. The cost of living has become so high that the salaries paid seem very small. Then it must be remembered that in many ports where there was some shipping before the war there is now little or none, owing to the scarcity of tonnage.


John Howard Sinclair: I am not urging an appointment; I am simply asking for information as to the minister's intention.


John Dowsley Reid: , I am not making appointments where I can avoid it.


John Howard Sinclair: I am glad to know that the minister is taking an economical view of these appointments, because, so far as I can learn, he has been very extravagant in this respect, possibly the greatest sinner among the ministers. From the public accounts he will find that in 1910-11 the expenditure of the Customs Department amounted to $2,187,174. During the last fiscal year, ended March 31, the expenditure in the same department was $3,685,399, an increase from 1910-11 of $1,498,225, or, roughly speaking, a million and a half of dollars. I do not think there is any justification for this enormous increase, which arises very largely, as I believe, from a reckless increase in the number of the staff. My hon. friend attempted to justify this last year and the year before, but I do not think that he succeeded. While there is no special increase this year, I should like the minister to explain the enormous increase, amounting to $1,500,000, in the cost of the administration of his department since he took office.


John Dowsley Reid: In the year 1910 the customs revenue was $87,596,426, and the cost of collection was 2.79 per cent. In the last fiscal year the revenue was $147,000,000, and the cost of collection was 2.64 per cent. Last year we had to increase our staff very materially on account of war conditions. In addition to 'that, over 200 men who enlisted prior to November, 1915, are being paid their salaries by the Customs Department.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: In the case of those
whose salaries as Customs officials exceed their military pay, do you charge only the difference against the department, or is it the custom to show the whole pay in the departmental returns?


John Dowsley Reid: We charge the difference
against the department. Of course, in the case of those enlisted before November, 1915, the whole pay is charged <to the Customs Department. Many of our men who have gone to the front were receiving quite large salaries in the Customs Department-probably more than they receive in the militia. One splendid man, our chief accountant, Major Rorke, who has been in the department a great many years, enlisted at the commencement of



the war and is receiving his full pay as a customs official as well as his military pay.


John Howard Sinclair: I do not agree with the principle laid down by the minister that because of an increase in the revenue there should be a corresponding increase in the official staff. Unless new offices were established in various parts of the country, the fact that a larger business had been done would not justify my hon. friend in increasing the staff to such a large extent. The Minister of Finance handled a billion dollars of gold last year, but, as far as I know, he did not increase his staff. But I do not think the Minister of Customs has opened many new offices; I rather think that he is overcrowding the offices in the cities and small towns. Soon after he took charge of the department he dismissed a young man in my town for the reason that there was not enough for him to do, and shortly afterwards he appointed two stalwart men, friends of his own party, to fill the place formerly occupied by the man who had had nothing to do. Many instances of the kind could be cited in respect of other parts of Canada as well, I attribute a large part of the increase to things of that kind.


John Dowsley Reid: At some of the large ports, 'especially on the coast, we had to increase the staff after the commencement of war. Moreover, our staff was increased through the employment of secret service men in connection with the war. I have already said that 232 men who enlisted prior to November, 1915, are receiving their full salaries. These men have had to be replaced, because they have come from offices from which they could not very well be spared. The hon. member refers to a case in North Sydney.


John Howard Sinclair: I was referring to New Glasgow.


John Dowsley Reid: I do not remember that case, but I do know that I have not put on a man at any port unless I was very strongly urged to do so by the chief inspector, the inspector, or the collector. In every case I have tried to keep the number of men employed at the different ports down as low as possible, having due regard to the interests of the service. I do not think that the hon. gentleman can point to one case where I have put on a man whose services were not absolutely necessary, and any hon. gentleman who has had anything

to do with the Customs Department will bear me out in that. I do not admit that at any port in the Dominion we have put on more men than are required.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: I do not wish to take up the minister's time unnecessarily, but I would like to understand a little more clearly the position of men who have joined the army and that of men who have not done so. As I understand it, up to a certain time-and the minister did not mention the time-all men who enlisted were paid not only their salaries from the Customs Department, but their salaries from the Militia Department. The money that was paid by the Militia Department does not appear as salary in the Estimates of my hon. friend, but the money that was paid by his department to the men who have enlisted does so appear. My hon. friend paid the full salaries down to a certain period, and I would like to know what that period was. After that period, he paid the difference between the militia salary and the salary received from the Customs Department, if there was a difference in the favour of the man who enlisted, and he charged to his own department that difference, but the money paid by the Militia Department is charged up in the War Appropriations. Do I understand my hon. friend correctly?


John Dowsley Reid: Yes, I think my hon. friend is right. I will explain the matter again and perhaps make it a little clearer. Shortly after war was declared, an Order in Council was passed by which we agreed to pay the full salary of any official, not necessarily of the Customs Department but of any department of the Government, who went overseas, in addition to his military pay. Suppose an official at Woodstock or any other port enlisted for overseas service, his name is kept on the paylist and the Customs Department continues to pay his salary just as though he were here.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Up to what date?


John Dowsley Reid: We are continuing to pay it. I am discussing the position of the man who enlisted between August 4, 1914, when war was declared, and November 30, 1915, a period of over a year and three months. That man's pay goes on just as though he were working in the Customs Department. Of course, such men gave instructions that their cheques were to be handed over to some relative, and that was done. Two hundred and thirty-two men have enlisted in that way.


John Howard Sinclair: Have you appointed
others in their places?


John Dowsley Reid: In many oases we have done so. Many men enlisted from large cities, such as Montreal, Toronto, or Hamilton, where we had to have others to fill their places, but in other places we did not require to replace men who enlisted. Some time in November, 1915, an OrdeT in Council was passed that men who enlisted after November 30, 1915, would be sure of their departmental salary. For instance, if an official employed in the Customs Department were receiving a certain salary and he enlisted in the militia as a private or a lieutenant, and the amount the Militia Department paid him for his services in the militia did not amount to the salary he was receiving in the Customs Department, then we would supplement the militia salary by an (amount that would make his total salary the same as though he had remained in the customs service, and that difference that we pay we charge up to the port in which that man was employed when Ihe went overseas.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: That would appear in your Estimates?


John Dowsley Reid: It appears in our Estimates as an expenditure under the Oustoms Department.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Will the minister give us the gross amount of that expenditure?


John Dowsley Reid: I have not that this evening, and I cannot say what that amount is.


John Howard Sinclair: If the argument is to be used as an explanation of the large increase in the expenses of the department we would like to know how much that (amounts to, and what expenditure has been incurred under that head. Perhaps the minister will bring us that when his estimates are up again.


John Dowsley Reid: I shall he very glad to bring that information for the hon. member.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: When those men who have enlisted come 'back and return to work, do their salaries from both the Militia Department and the Customs Department still continue?


John Dowsley Reid: No. What happens is this: 'If an official of the Customs Department returns to Canada he will probably be invalided home. We have had some cases where men who have been wounded at the front have returned, and when they come back here they may go to the hospital and 117i
it may take them two or three months or more to regain their health to such an extent that they can resume their work. The Militia Department then give them their discharge, and they take up their positions again in the department and are paid only the one salary, the customs salary. Some of the men who return have been wounded and they may receive pensions.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: What is the position if they are not wounded, but simply come home on furlough?


John Dowsley Reid: I have not come across any cases of that nature. I know one case of a young man who was wounded who came home, and probably there are more .cases like that. This young man was wounded in the leg and he received three months' furlough. He is at present at his home at London, but his salary is being paid just the same. He is returning to the front; in fact, I think he sails on Thursday. In a case of that kind, of course, we would pay the salary.


Mr. BUCHANAN:: I wish to discuss with the minister the removal of Mr. F. D. Shaw from the position of Collector of Customs at Lethbridge on the ground of insubordination. I have not been able to get the papers produced in connection with the case, but I have some of thp correspondence here, and it strikes me that the reasons for removing Mr. Shaw are not based on a very good foundation. Mr. Shaw had been in the customs service for over twenty years, and in August last he was removed from his position at Lethbridge on the ground of insubordination; that, without the sanction of the department at Ottawa he had placed a man in a position in the Lethbridge office. It is true that Mr. Shaw did place a man in a position in the Lethbridge office without the sanction of the department, but he did so on the recommendation of Mr. W. S. Ball, the gentleman who is in charge of the patronage in the constituency of Medicine Hat. This is the letter that Mr. Shaw addressed to the Commissioner of Customs in regard to the matter:
Lethbridge, Alta., 28 Aug., 1916. Commissioner of Customs,
Ottawa, Ont.
Sir,-
The following was handed me on the 26th inst. by Mr. Victor McGuire:
"I wish to -recommend Victor McGuire to fill the place recently vacated by F. G. Wad-dington.
(Sgd.) W. S. Ball."

Mr. McGuire reported kere on the 26th inst., and I asked him to call Mdnday, which he did, and I have taken him on the staff of this office temporarily, subject to your approval. My action in doing so was that he might be posted in some of the port work as Officer Burnett will be applying for his leave shortly.
I called on Mr. Ball this a.m., but found him out of town and could get no further information, but his partner said Mr. Ball had probably received word to appoint Mr. McGuire.
Mr. Shaw appointed this man solely on the recommendation of the gentlemen in charge of the patronage, and he has been removed from office on the ground that he had no right to make this appointment. As soon as Mr. Shaw had been removed, Mr. Ball, the Conservative candidate, who had charge of the patronage, wired the department assuming full responsibility for the appointment of McGuire. This is his telegram to the Commissioner of Customs, Ottawa:
Sir,-*
On August 26th, in reply to your letter asking me to recommend a man in Waddington's place, I wrote you recommending V. McGuire, and also wrote Mr. Shaw to same effect. I take full responsibility for this action and wish Mr. Shaw reinstated at once. There are no returned soldiers to fill Waddington's position.
(Sgnd.) W. S. Ball.
I understand that one of the reasons given by the department for removing Mt. Shaw was that they felt that any vacancies should be filled by returned soldiers. But there were no returned soldiers there at that time, and Mr. Shaw, acting on the advice of the gentleman in charge of the patronage, placed Mr. McGuire in the position. He advised the department that he had done so, and later on was notified that he had been removed on account of insubordination. As I have said, Mr. Ball immediately notified the department that he was wholly responsible, having asked Mr. Shaw to appoint McGuire temporarily, pending ratification from Ottawa. Those are the circumstances, and still Mr. Shaw is out of his position, and, so far as I know, there is no possibility of his being reinstated. It may have been a rule of the department that no person should be taken on the staff without sanction from the department at Ottawa. I understand, however, that there have been cases previously where the patronage committee had recommended certain appointments, and the men had been taken on, and the department at Ottawa subsequently ratified the appointments. Mr. Shaw was in this position: he had to please either the local patronage committee or the depart-

ment at Ottawa, and from the experience all other officials in Lethbridge had had with the patronage committee, I am quite certain Mr. Shaw was anxious to please the patronage committee. Mr. Shaw was appointed, I believe, by the Government of the late Sir John A. Macdonald, and he had been in the Customs Department of Alberta from that time until last fall. In view of his long experience, and of the circumstances I have presented, I think it is only fair that he should at least be granted an investigation into the charges made against him, and I am sure that any impartial investigator with the facts before him that I have here, would not recommend his removal from office. Mr. Shaw had the reputation of being one of the best customs officers in the southern part of Alberta. He had been in the service for years, and had given satisfaction to the business community. But the department, without any regard to these circumstances, removed him from his position, and have not given him an opportunity of presenting his case before any impartial investigator. I am sure Mr. Shaw would be quite satisfied with an investigation into this particular case. From the evidence I have here, and from the conversations I have had with Mr. Shaw,' I am sure that he could establish that he was not at fault, and was simply acting on the request of the gentleman in charge of the patronage in the city of Lethbridge.
I understand that it has been charged that Mr. Shaw took similar action in a number of other instances, but he assures me that no complaint had ever been made against any appointments he had made on recommendations of this kind, and that in no time during his service in the Customs Department had any complaint been made against him as 'a customs officer. Mr. Ball assumes full responsibility for having recommended McGuire, and naturally Mr. Shaw wanted to satisfy the gentleman in charge of the patronage. He followed the usual course of advising the department that he was taking this man on, and following that he was removed from office.


John Dowsley Reid: Before I answer the hon.
member, I might- say to my hon. friend from Guysborough that the collections for New Glasgow in the fiscal year ending 1912 were $135,558, and the number of officers in that year was four. During the last fiscal year the collections amounted .to $800,878, and the number of officers was six. On account of the Bussian orders and so forth we had to put on extra men.


John Howard Sinclair: What were the figures
at the time these additions to the staff were made?


John Dowsley Reid: I can get that for my hon.
friend. As regards Mr. Shaw, he was appointed by the Conservative party, so there can be no question of a dismissal for political reasons.


George Perry Graham: Unless a younger and
more up to date fellow wanted his job.


John Dowsley Reid: The vacancy occurred some months ago, and I decided to follow our usual policy of appointing a returned soldier to the position. I am still holding the position open in the hope of getting a returned soldier to fill it; I think no one will object to that. The hon. member states that Mr. Shaw has been a satisfactory official, but I may say that Mr. Shaw did not give satisfaction to this department. I have had many complaints against him during the time I have been administering the department.
Mr. BU'OHANAN:	Has any complaint
been made that he did not give satisfaction as an officer?


John Dowsley Reid: Yes, parties have given me
that information.


William Ashbury Buchanan: That was npt the reason given for his removal.


John Dowsley Reid: This was not the first time
that Mr. Shaw had appointed any one he liked. If I remember rightly, my predecessor, through the Commissioner of Customs, reprimanded Mr. Shaw for appointing an official just as he did in this case, I think that a month or two before we did suspend him. He did not then carry out the instructions of the chief inspector. I understand from my officials that Mr. Shaw seemed to wish to run the port of Lethbridge irrespective of the department. Of course, you cannot run a department that way. So, Mr. Shaw was suspended. If I [DOT]remember rightly, he wrote to the department, or to myself, a very insulting letter, at a time when I was considering the taking up of his case again.


William Ashbury Buchanan: Was not that letter
written by a lawyer in Lethbridge?


John Dowsley Reid: It may be that a lawyer
wrote it for him, but I remember receiving a very insulting letter. Mr. Shaw certainly was deserving of suspension for the position he took after he was suspended. His dismissal was not for the purpose of putting
some friend of the party into his position, but because the officials of the Government thought he deserved dismissal. I have not accepted the recommendation of any one for appointment to that office, but am keeping it open, as I .am keeping other offices open, including some in my own county, for returned soldiers.


William Ashbury Buchanan: Did the minister take into consideration the wire that came from the gentleman handling the patronage, to the effect that he took full responsibility for the appointment of this gentleman to the staff?


John Dowsley Reid: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Buchanan) knows that only the commissioner or the minister would have authority to say whether an official was required or not. I have always refused to take on an officer on the recommendation of any one without first having him examined to make sure that he is qualified for the position.


William Ashbury Buchanan: Had not the other
course been permitted .in the office of the port of Lethbridge?


John Dowsley Reid: Not so fax as I am aware.
The position I have taken ever since I began administering the department is that there must be an examination by the inspector or, if deemed better under special circumstances, by some other high official, such as the Collector, before an appointment is made. If a man is appointed without an examination, he may prove to be not qualified for the office, and then there is difficulty in dispensing with his .services. So far as my memory .goes, we have never appointed an officer at Lethbridge without an examination. There may have been exceptions, hut I do not recollect any.


William Ashbury Buchanan: I am pretty intimately acquainted with the business community in Lethbridge, and I never heard any complaints against Mr. Shaw as an officer, but since his removal I have heard 9 p.m. many expressions of dissatisfaction with the Government's action in his case. The minister speaks of an insulting letter he received, written on behalf of Mr. Shaw. I think I can explain that without mentioning the name of the writer. There is in Lethbridge a very warm admirer of the Prime Minister (Sir Robert Borden), an old acquaintance of his from .Nova Scotia, and when Mr. Shaw was removed this gentleman was so indignant that he wrote not only to the

Prime Minister tout also to the department. He did not write as a lawyer representing Mr. Shaw, tout as an indignant Conserwar tive of Lethbridge, and he is so indignant that I doubt very much whether this Government will receive his support in the next general election. That is where the "insulting letter" came fjroim. And the writer of that letter is not alone; there is great dissatisfaction amongst many leading supporters of the Government over the removal of Mr. Shaw. If there was any complaint in the business community of Lethbridge against the conduct of Mr. Shaw in office, I never heard of it. I have heard of a very powerful concern operating in Southern Alberta objecting to his actions, and they probably have made complaint, but I understand that those complaints are not to his discredit, for he was simply carrying out the regulations of the department. As to his removal, Mr. Shaw's position is simply this:	They have in Lethbridge a patronage committee, and unquestionably he was afraid of that committee and was trying to do all he could to satisfy it. When he took this gentleman on the staff, on the recommendation of the patronage committee, I think he felt warranted in doing so; in fact he felt that should he fail to carry out their instructions they would use their influence at Ottawa to have him removed. And now the department dismisses him for that action. I venture to say that in any ordinary business concern a man who had acted as Mr. Shaw had acted, under the conditions that faced him, would be reinstated. I do not, think the removal was fair. Mr. Shaw was entitled to an investigation, and, had his case been investigated by an impartial investigator, I am confident recommendation would have been made for his reinstatement.


George Perry Graham: The minister has told us that he is keeping a number of offices for returned soldiers. In the town of Brock-ville he has made an appointment of one returned soldier, which appointment meets the approval of every person.


John Dowsley Reid: I have appointed three.


George Perry Graham: There is one that I remember. Can the minister tell us how many returned soldiers he has appointed, what is their status, and what is the aggregate of their salaries?


John Dowsley Reid: I could not give the aggregate, of their salaries, but up to the end of April 203 appointments of returned soldiers had been made, at salaries averaging $900 to
	'
$1,000 a year. And others are being appointed.


George Perry Graham: There is one office, I have been told, which is being kept for a returned soldier-the collectorship of the port of Montreal. It seems to be a question whether the port of Montreal collectorship or the port of Toronto collectorship is vacant, for, on the resignation of Mr. White in Montreal, Mr. Bertram, of Toronto, was sent to Montreal. In my personal communication with people of Montreal, while they have no fault' to find with Mr. Bertram as an official, yet they cannot understand why it is necessary to take an official from Toronto to succeed an official in Montreal. They have been told that Mr. Bertram is to return to Toronto, but there is nothing definite as to time or occasion. The situation is a very peculiar one, and if there is a precedent for it I cannot lay my hand on that precedent at the present time. When certain Conservatives of Montreal have approached the department as to whether there was any person in the province of Quebec competent to succeed Mr. White they have been told that the collectorship of Montreal was being reserved for a returned soldier. Could the minister give us any idea as to what soldier he has in mind?


John Dowsley Reid: Montreal is the most important port in Canada and it is very important at the present time on account of war conditions. When it became vacant I suggested, that, like other vacancies, it should go to a returned soldier. It was my first intention to send Mr. H. C. Blair, who is one of our best inspectors, to Montreal.


George Perry Graham: Where is he?


John Dowsley Reid: He is from Ottawa. I sent him to Toronto for this reason: the man had just lost his son at the front and Toronto is not as hard a port to manage at the present time as is Montreal. I asked if Mr. Bertram could go to Montreal and take charge until a returned soldier would' come back because it required a first class man. If the hon. gentleman knows Mr. Bertram, he will agree with me that there is no man in Canada better qualified to fill the position than Mr. Bertram. I explained to Mr. Bertram that I wanted him to take that place until a soldier came back. There is no man-no returned soldier-in my mind that I intend to appoint to that position. I am waiting until they come back.

But there are a number of prominent Montreal men who are qualified to fill that position and who are now over at the front. I have heard the names of one or two wounded officers who have been at the front, who have taken a great part and who have received honours for bravery. I have said that if one of these men-I do not care which-returns and is qualified to fill that position, he will be appointed and Mr. Bertram will then return to the city of Toronto. The hon. member knows that if you are holding a vacancy of that kind for a returned soldier, it is better to get some one from outside to fill the place temporarily than to ask one of the officials of the port to take it. If you promote him to the position of collector, it is hard to change him back to the position that he might have occupied before. In addition to that, the number of men on the staff in Montreal who may be qualified to fill that position is limited. While I am administering the Customs Department I will fill any vacancies in that department by the appointment of those who have been injured in France. No matter whether it is the position of collector of Customs of Montreal, which is the highest salaried position in the Custom service. I will hold it for a returned soldier.


George Perry Graham: I am glad to hear the minister make that public announcement; really that is what I was after.


John Dowsley Reid: I made it before.


George Perry Graham: Not so publicly. I wanted to get it on record because these things are better when they are really official and the public understand them.


John Dowsley Reid: I made this very same statement in the House and it is on Hansard.


George Perry Graham: Perhaps I was not here, but the people of Montreal are still incredulous. There are certain Conservatives in Montreal who believe that the minister is keeping this position open for a wounded soldier, but it is to be a wounded political soldier who may now be in the Government and who is going to be wounded in the house of his friends politically. Some people think that this position is being retained with the idea that somebody, some minister-not necessarily my hon. friend- may find it possible to discover himself after readjustment time comes in the weeks that are to follow. I wanted to get the hon. gentleman to publicly admit that it is a soldier who, as he says, has been in France
and has returned. I was delighted to hear the minister say that it was to be reserved for a soldier wounded on the European battlefield and that it was not being kept for a soldier wounded in the Government at Ottawa or something of that kind. Now that it has been so clearly defined, the people of Montreal can rest assured that Mr. Bertram is to stay there only until some returned soldier who is qualified, and is a resident of Quebec, will get the appointment.


John Dowsley Reid: If he returns while I am administering the department, he will.


George Perry Graham: He may have to come back very soon. My hon. friend's successor in office may be a person who is not in sympathy with the view of my hon. friend. I want to make sure that it is a returned soldier who is going to get this position in Montreal because that is what my hon. friend has said. What he has announced to-night will help somewhat to steady the feeling in Montreal which is not very sure-I am not positive that it will be sure yet-but in so far as the minister can say, his statement has limited the opportunity for appointment during the next few weeks because he gives us the assurance that it will be a returned soldier who will get the position. Can the minister give us the assurance that that is to be the Government's policy? I do not mean that it is only to be his policy because ministers may go and ministers may come but the Government may remain if it can do so by its own vote and I am anxious to know if that is to be the policy of the Government or if it is to be deviated from if the minister goes out. I want to commit the Conservative Government to this policy with regard to the port of Montreal and not the minister individually because he may not have the power.


John Dowsley Reid: As far as the people of Montreal are concerned, I do not think they are very much troubled as to who will fill this position. I have not any doubt at all that if my health keeps good I will fill the position of Minister of Customs for many years. I am not a bit alarmed about what will happen, 1


George Perry Graham: You mean you will attempt to fill it.


John Dowsley Reid: I am satisfied that I will sit on this si'de of the House and fill the position of Minister of Customs.


George Perry Graham: Not fill it-you do not mean that?


John Dowsley Reid: As far as the Collector of Customs is concerned, when I say that as a member of the Government it will be filled by a returned soldier, it means that the Government will carry out that policy and fill it by the appointment of a returned soldier. I only hope and trust that if the hon. member comes into power, if he get3 on this side, he will give the returned soldiers the same treatment that I am giving them as Minister of Customs.


George Perry Graham: I am glad to draw that, too, because it is very illuminating. My hon. friend a moment ago, very carefully assured us that "so long as I am Minister of Customs," refraining from committing the Government to it as a matter of policy, he would do a certain thing. Now he has committed the Government and I am satisfied that, in so far as the Government of which he is a member will have power when the time comes, they will appoint a returned soldier to the position.


John Howard Sinclair: Does that apply to the other departments of the Government as well as to the Customs Department?


John Dowsley Reid: So far as I know, it does.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I wish to refer to the conditions in my own town of North Sydney. I am not going to say much about the number of officials appointed by the minister. He has increased the staff, I think, about 200 per cent. But I have another fault to find with the minister, and that is that he has not treated fairly in the matter of promotions the officials whom he found in office as compared with the favourites of the Conservative party who werfe appointed to office after this Government came into power. I think that when an old official is doing his work well he has a right to be treated exactly in the same way as the new man who comes into office under a different Administration. The minister told us that nobody was appointed to any position except upon the recommendation of either the chief officer of customs at the port where the appointment was to be made, or of some customs official or inspector. I can tell the minister how these recommendations were made, so far as the chief officers were concerned. They were made simply because those men an many instances were Liberals, holding their offices after the change of Government by the grace of the Minister of Customs and some Tory ward

heelers who had the power of dismissal and appointment in their hands, as they believed they had and as I have no doubt they had. When they wanted anybody appointed they would simply go to the customs officer, take him by the throat and say: Here, I am told that if you recommend me to office I will be appointed. Then the customs officer had no alternative; he had no soul of his own; he was trying to protect his own head, and he would give that letter of recommendation that such and such a man should be appointed. That is the way those recommendations came to the minister, and he will find on inquiry that they were given simply because they were demanded by parties who wanted to be appointed to office. In North Sydney he will find that there were only five officials doing the whole work of the department in 1911 before the change of Government. To-day there are ten men doing the same work. I submit that there was no increase in the revenue at the port of North Sydney that would justify such a large increase in the number of officials appointed to do that work. My complaint is in reference to one of the oldest officers there, an officer named McDonald, a good official, a man against whom there has never been one black mark, so far as faithful service to the department is concerned. The moment the change of Government took place, there ceased to be any notice given to him or any advance in his pay. Younger men who came into the service nine or ten years after his appointment, are to-day enjoying larger salaries than he is enjoying, and they have been advanced in their pay year after year since their appointment. Since the change of Government, Mr. McDonald stands out as a marked man, and not one dollar of increase has been given to him. I submit that this is not fair treatment, I was going to say that it was not manly treatment, and if recommendations for increases of salary are made as the minister says,-by officers in his own department, I want to know by what philosophy or what sense of smell, if I may use the expression, they can detect from the Customs Department here at Ottawa the difference between John McDonald and the other officials in the town of North Sydney, so that they can promote all others who are Tories and leave McDonald behind. This I feel should be brought to the attention of the minister, and I do not think he can defend conduct of that kind. I would also want to know why, when the offices were not enlarged, with the same buildings, the

same work, the same offices, it was necessary to have ten men to do the work which was accomplished and satisfactorily performed by five men in 1911. At the town of Sydney Mines the same thing occurs. There was only one man there before and there has been an increase of 100 per cent; there are now two men doing the work of one, possibly on the recommendation of -somebody who wanted to get a position, when one would have been sufficient. I submit that too many appointments have been made and that unfair treatment has been meted out to the Liberals who had been occupying positions before the change of Government took place.


John Dowsley Reid: I hardly think the hon. member is fair in his criticism in so far as that port is concerned. He stated there were ten men on the pay-lists at that port instead of six. In counting the ten he is including Mr. Brennan, who is overseas, and of course is not at work at that port, so it would mean nine men, or an increase of three men. I find that on the 16th of May, 1912, the collector ot North Sydney w-rote the department that the Reid-New-foundland line intended placing an additional vessel on the route between Port aux Basques and North Sydney, making a daily service, and they wanted another man to attend to that service.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: That is just what I say, a man wanted the office and he made the collector write the letter.


John Dowsley Reid: In addition to that, on the 29th January, 1915, the collector wrote the department asking for the appointment of " an officer whose duty would be to board all shipping and report same, and keep records and make annual reports to the 'depairtalent, subject to the collector as Officer Foran had to spend most of his time at inside work." Then, on account of war conditions, it was necessary to have extra employees at that port. So far as the treatment of officers is concerned, the hon. member states that I have not treated the Liberal officers fairly, or that I have given preference to those whc have been appointed since the change of Government. I have before me the record of the staff at North Sydney. The collector is Joseph McPherson, who receives a salary of $1,600 per annum, overtime $295, and for services in connection with Inland Revenue, $347. Mr. Brennan is overseas; we pay him his salary, $950. Mr. J. H. Cameron was appointed in 1913 as appraiser and gauger at
$1,200 a year. I would say that that is not a large salary for the position.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: How did you get along previously without that official?


John Dowsley Reid: The Commissioner of Cusr
toms, who was there himself and looked into the matter recommended the employment of an appraiser and gauger at North Sydney. Mr. John Cogan was appointed in May, 1914, at a salary of $800; his overtime pay last year was $281.10. Mr. McDonald, who, with Mr. Cogan, is acting as landing waiter, receives a salary of $800; his overtime pay last year was $284.10. These gentlemen, one a Liberal appointee, and the other a Conservative, are receiving practically the same salary. Mr. David Edwards, clerk, receives $900 a year; his overtime last year was $292.80. Clerks rank higher in the service than landing waiters, and receive a higher salary. Mr. F. E. Jackson receives $1,000 and his last year's overtime was $308.10. He is a clerk in the long room. Mr. James McLeod, whose salary is $800, does not appear to have received any overtime pay. Mr. Hector W. McNeil was appointed in 1915; last year he received $900 as salary and $124.20 as overtime. His salary and overtime, therefore, amount to less than the remuneration given to Mr. McDonald or to Mr. Cogan. Mr. Angus Young, who patrols the harbour, boards vessels, and reports same, received $1,000 and $499.50 overtime. That is the whole of the North Sydney staff. The salaries paid to the landing waiters are the same as those paid prior to the war; they are the salaries of that class. I have taken up the matter of increasing the salaries of those who receive less than $900; if this matter had come up a few days later, the landing waiters at North Sydney would probably have been among those recommended for an increase. Having regard to war conditions, the salaries of many of the officials are really low. I feel very strongly that something should be done to help many of those who are getting these small salaries. In many instances we have been able to increase the salaries owing to the saving made in reducing the staff at certain places. Some proposed increases are now before Council, and from time to time we shall endeavour to increase the salaries of those who are in this $800 class.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The minister did not
explain the point of my criticism. He has not stated why every one of these ten men received an increase of salary except Mr. COMMONS
McDonald, who is the only Liberal among them. This action sh,ows that the partyism which has characterized my hon. friend's administration of the department ever since he took office has 'been visited upon this man McDonald. The man whom they got to perjure himself in an attempt to find fault against McDonald was committed to penitentiary fpr perjury. The minister did not explain who was appointed to meet the new boat. McDonald used to meet the boat when only one was running; if this man Mr. Edwards does anything outside he meets the other boat. McDonald has been in the service about 20 years, while Edwards has been in the service only a few years. Edwards gets a larger salary than McDonald simply because he is a pet of the Administration. McDonald is still in the service because those who were seeking to have him dismissed could find no other man to peTjure himself against him. The minister cannot defend his position; he might as well say: yes, we have singled this man out just as we single out everybody who is not a Conservative and try to starve him out of house and home.


John Dowsley Reid: I think that my hon. friend is hardly fair in his assertions. He says that I have increased the salaries of all those who have been appointed since we came into power. Mr. Cogan was appointed on May 18, 1914 at a salary of $800. This, w'ith the overtime, is practically the same as the amount received by Mr. McDonald.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Has length of service nothing to do with promotion?


John Dowsley Reid: I think it is hardly fair for
the hon. gentleman to say that we have promoted every man who was appointed by this Government and have allowed the Liberals to remain where they were. As to the additions to the staff, two of the new appointments were asked for, as I have said, by the collector of customs for the reasons stated. The collector wrote the commissioner urging that two men be appointed, but having regard to war conditions, we could not then see why they should be appointed at the present time. The commissioner, however, on his visit to North Sydney, after looking over the port, considered it was in the interest of the service that an appraiser should be appointed. All that I know about the matter is that the collector urged that two more men be appointed; the officials of the department acting on his advice, so far as I know, finally decided that those appoint-

ments were necessary, and we appointed the two men that I have named, and it was at the request of the commissioner that I appointed the appraiser. The hon. member is hardly fair in his criticism of me so far as filling the positions in that port or any treatment of the officers is concerned. As for Mr. McDonald, I cannot remember all the circumstances, but if Mr. McDonald was an appointee of the previous Government, he is still in his position, and if I had such a feeling as the hon. member states I have, I might have had him dismissed, but I retained him in that position.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: As I stated, you could not get any evidence against him except that of a man who perjured himself and who was sent to the penitentiary for perjury. You did not dare to try the case against him the second time.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Do I understand that the Minister of Customs does not permit any politics to enter his mind in the administration of his department? Is that the rule?


John Dowsley Reid: Always the rule.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I wish the minister would consult me about customs matters in the port of Halifax, because I would be pleased to advise him, and I think I could give him very good advice. Might I have the promise that I shall be consulted about such matters in the future?


John Dowsley Reid: I have no objection to that, and I shall be very glad to have the hon. member's advice.


George Perry Graham: The minister will ask for your advice after an appointment is made.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I wish to make an inquiry for the purpose of eliciting some information in regard to a matter about which I know very little. In the British Columbia papers I have from time to time noticed that applications are made to the Department of Customs for the appointment of a customs official at the port of New York. I understand that the purpose of this requested appointment is to facilitate shipments originating on the Pacific coast to eastern Canadian points via American ports. To put the matter in a concrete form, I understand that if a shipper of Canadian produce on the Pacific coast desires to ship to the port of Montreal in the winter, he must tranship at some American port, and he desires that there be a Canadian customs official at that

port in order to facilitate transhipments and to enable him to escape some onerous customs regulations and, I suppose, the payment of duty. I do not pretend to be well informed on the matter, and I am rather anxious to understand exactly the nature of the request made by the Vancouver Board of Trade and the boards of trade of various towns of British Columbia. I wish the minister would be good enough to explain the details of the request and the position of the department on the matter.


John Dowsley Reid: For some little time there has been such an agitation in British Columbia. It was started, I believe, by the Maple Leaf line running from New York to San Francisco and Vancouver. What they asked the department to do was to place a customs officer at New York and allow them to ship their products, say from Ontario and the lower provinces, by rail to New York, where they would be placed in a vessel, for shipment to Vancouver. The Board of Trade, as I understand the matter, said that the shipments would be made only in British vessels. The bonding privileges between the two countries are carried on in this manner: the goods may be shipped from one point in Canada to another through American territory, but in such cases, the freight cars are sealed when they leave Canada, and when they re-enter Canadian territory, the seals are broken by a customs official, so that there is no question that the goods are in the same condition as when they left Canada. There were different reasons why I could hardly see that it would be in the interest of Canada to grant that request. One reason was that it would be difficult to carry it out in the way of bonding the goods, the same as we do in the case of goods shipped by rail, because when the goods left Canada they would be placed on a vessel, and the part of the vessel in which the goods were could not be sealed.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Might the goods not bear a mark?


Mr REID:: You might.put a mark on
them, 'but still that mark might be obliterated. Another reason was this: we could not put an officer in the port of New York on the distinct understanding that the traffic between New York and Vancouver would be carried only by British vessels, because if we were to attempt to do that, we might create difficulties with the United States Government. Then again, it did not
seem to me to be fair that our products in eastern Canada, products that we feel British Columbia should have, and the products in British Columbia that we should have in eastern Canada, that is, goods that should be transported by water on account of the cheapness of the article, should have to be shipped from one part of the Dominion to the other, on foreign vessels, or by means of other transportation in the hands of foreigners. British Columbia and eastern Canada should have every facility of water transportation, but in the summer time shipments should be made in vessels coming to Montreal, St. John or Halifax. The port would be Montreal, if the goods came from Quebec or vicinity, and St. John or Halifax, if the goods came from the lower provinces. From those ports the vessels would carry the cargoes around to Vancouver, and vice versa when the freight is from the West the vessels would come from Vancouver to those ports that I have mentioned. After the war broke out it was impossible to get vessels to engage in that trade. Freight rates have gone up enormously, and I do not think there is any possibility of getting either British or American vessels for that service while the war is on.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That does not affect the principle at all.


John Dowsley Reid: It is, therefore, of no advantage to consider' the placing of an officer at New York at the present time.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I understand that British Columbia made a request for the appointment of such an official long before the war. The question is bound to come up again.


John Dowsley Reid: A request was made a short time before the war, but there were the objections that I have stated. Believing that it would be in the interests of our Atlantic and Pacific ports, I suggested to the Government that we give a contract for two vessels to start this service.


George Perry Graham: Will they be subsidized, or Government steamers?


John Dowsley Reid: Government steamers.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That will not meet the difficulty. In the case of a ship, for instance, landing at Halifax with a cargo destined for Toronto or Hamilton, the minister suggests that the cargo be landed at Halifax and proceed by rail to Toronto or Hamilton. Now the shipper might not be able to stand the railway rates. I am

speaking of the winter season, when the ships could not proceed to Montreal.


John Dowsley Reid: I understand that the Canadian Pacific Railway rate from Hamilton to St. John is exactly the same as from Hamilton to New York. The railways give exactly the same rates to our Atlantic ports as to New York, and if a vessel arrived at Halifax with a cargo for Toronto or Hamilton the rate would he the same as from New York to those points.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: But Halifax would not be so advantageous a port as New York for getting a return cargo.


John Dowsley Reid: The railway companies have agents all over the provinces looking for traffic.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Not for westbound traffic via the Panama Canal.


John Dowsley Reid: I mean return cargo for vessels.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The Canadian railways would not encourage that.


John Dowsley Reid: There is a lot of cheap freight that must be carried in that way. In the summer time there is a water route, for instance, from Montreal to Port Arthur, and a rail rate beyond, and the railways are looking for that traffic.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The Canadian railways surely would not encourage competition by giving a special freight rate from eastern Canadian points to New York. That would simply be encouraging traffic by water from New York to Vancouver. The minister's scheme would be of immense advantage in developing traffic if the steamers could get a return cargo from Halifax or St. John, but they are not likely to get it.


John Dowsley Reid: They are likely to get it from points in Ontario and other provinces. For instance, if a man had a cargo of timber at Vancouver which he wanted to ship to Hamilton, if we had an officer at New York he could get the American rate. The American railways have a rate right through to New York, and all the shipper would have to do would be to add the American rate to the water rate. The advantage to the railway companies is that they get the haul from Toronto or Hamilton to St. John or Halifax. The Canadian Pacific would get the traffic from Hamilton to St. John, the Government railway system from Ham-
[Mr. A. K. Maclean !
ilton to Halifax, the Canadian Northern or the Grand Trunk to Montreal, and the Intercolonial the balance. The railways must compete with that water traffic, and they do it in order to get a portion of the haul. This proposed service would encourage traffic between the Atlantic and Pacific ports through our own country, and it might also encourage traffic between the West Indies and Canada. I do not know the situation thoroughly, but it is possible that if a vessel had not a full cargo for Montreal she could take freight for the West Indies, and bring back sugar to this country. I do not think it will be possible to get vessels of any kind while the war is on. We have given a contract for two vessels, and I should like to see them built and in commission.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: In what service?


John Dowsley Reid: From Vancouver to Halifax and St. John in the winter, and to Montreal in the summer.	,


Edward Walter Nesbitt: My dear Mr. Minister, if you want to assist in building up traffic between eastern and western Canada, all you have to do' is to arrange with the United States authorities to put a Customs officer at New York, and they will do the rest, and they will do it a lot cheaper than you can, by any vessels you put on. I know what I am talking about, because I know the rates, and it is the New York rates that will bring the rate down and give us the accommodation.


John Dowsley Reid: I am not taking issue with that. Notwithstanding what the hon. member says I think I know what I am talking about too, and I believe I am absolutely right. I feel very strongly, much stronger than the hon. gentleman does, that it is in the interests of Canada, in the interests of Halifax and St. John, where we are enlarging the harbours, and in the interests of Vancouver, that every bit of freight we can carry between eastern and western points should be handled by our own men, by our own ships, and by our own railways. I believe also, notwithstanding what the hon. gentleman says, that our Canadian vessels, our Canadian railways, manned by our Canadian citizens, can carry from Vancouver to Montreal as cheaply as Americans can.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: I agree, but we are not
doing it. I am as loyal to our people and to our carriers as is the hon. gentleman, but when they want exorbitant rates, rates

so high that we cannot get our goods into the hands of the consumers at prices that they can afford to pay, then I say we want competition.


John Dowsley Reid: I was not taking issue with
the hon. gentleman on a question of loyalty, but I say that we can carry as cheaply as Americans can. He says we are not doing it, but I do not accept his statement; I believe we are doing it. I say that freight rates from Hamilton by our roads are the same as on American roads. We have never had a vessel route yet. It is all very well for the hon. gentleman to talk about rates being cheaper by way of New York, but he is speaking of the time before the war when vessels were running.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: You can get them now.


John Dowsley Reid: No, I have made inquiries,
and I can tell the hon. gentleman that there are really no vessels there. To-day we are carrying freight on our railways at the same rates as via New York, and, as soon as we get these vessels we shall have the competition just as there has been in ordinary times, and I am confident that our Canadian vessels will carry at equally low Tates with the American vessels, and perhaps lower.


Mr. SINCLAIE:: The minister says we
have two vessels under construction that may be used for this trade?


John Dowsley Reid: I said we gave a contract for two vessels.


John Ewen Sinclair: To whom?


John Dowsley Reid: To two shipbuilding companies in Vancouver.


John Ewen Sinclair: Ate they steel vessels?


John Dowsley Reid: No, wooden.


John Ewen Sinclair: Freight vessels?


John Dowsley Reid: Yes.


John Ewen Sinclair: The intention ie to use them on the route from Vancouver to Atlantic ports by way of the Panama canal? Are they steam or sailing vessels?


John Dowsley Reid: They have what is called auxiliary power. They run eight or nine knots an hour.


John Ewen Sinclair: That would be a very slow service. I cannot understand the hon. minister's explanation. His main reason seems to be that because one cannot send a whole shipload at one time it would not be advisable to send packet freight. But we
are now using the bonding privilege to send goods to the United States, and we do not need to send a whole carload, do we? One can send a locked trunk, can he not?


John Dowsley Reid: It goes in a bonded car.


John Ewen Sinclair: I would not object to that. But if you can send such a package without violating the customs regulations, why not facilitate the traffic by having an officer in New York? Then it will be possible to put goods aboard a steamer running between Halifax and New York, or between Quebec and New York, and tranship them to another boat running through the Panama canal, and perhaps tranship again in order to reach Vancouver. Why should not these facilities be granted? The minister's reasons, so far as I can understand them, do not seem to be sound. And the remedy he proposes seems to me ridiculous. He is going to have auxiliary-power wooden sailing vessels put on the route. That would be the slowest kind of a
10 p.m. line that ever was and would never work up any trade worth while. I hope the minister is ambitious to do more than that.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I agree that it is desirable to confine to our own transportation lines, as far as possible, our domestic traffic. But here is a special condition which requires special treatment. I do not see anything strange in appointing customs officials at the port of New York to facilitate transhipment from vessels laden with cargo from Vancouver and destined for eastern Canadian points. One would need to understand better than I do the cargo that vessels sailing from eastern Canada to Vancouver would be likely to carry. It might not be possible to get a west-bound cargo at a Canadian port at all-I do not know that, but I say it is probable. But a Vancouver steamer can secure a return cargo at the port of New York, goods originating in Canada and reaching New York in bond. All the Vancouver people ask for is the same facilities for their products destined for eastern Canada.


John Dowsley Reid: No, they cannot ship to Canadian eastern ports through New York now.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: But that steamer on her return trip can be loaded with Canadian goods which have come through American territory on American rails in bond?


John Dowsley Reid: No, they cannot do that.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Why not? Do I understand that Canadian goods cannot be shipped from a Canadian point to the port of New York, there to be loaded aboard a steamer bound to British Columbia without paying duty?


John Dowsley Reid: No; if they could do that, they could do the same thing back again.


George Perry Graham: I want to come back again to the appointment of returned soldiers. The minister will see in a moment why I was so anxious that he should commit himself and also commit his colleagues on this subject. I find in the London Advertiser the following despatch:
New Postmaster.
St. Marys Office Pilled, But Not by Returned Soldier.
St. Marys, May 27.-Bert L. Lancaster has been, appointed postmaster, vice T. O. Robson, who resigned through illness.
It was expected that Lincoln Rice, a Toronto University student and a returned soldier, would be given the appointment in view of the Government promise to give invalided soldiers, where qualified, such positions.
The Postmaster General, who -is in uniform, and has been on a recruiting tour in Quebec, is responsible for appointing a man, undoubtedly at the request of political friends, and declining to appoint a returned soldier as postmaster in St. Mary's. You can understand why, with that kind of a disposition, he would not make a successful recruiting officer, and the minister will be able to see the necessity and wisdom of my committing the Postmaster General to the policy of appointing returned soldiers, which policy has been violated by him no longer ago than on May 27.


John Dowsley Reid: The hon. member should
bring it up on Postmaster General's estimates. I do not know anything about it.


George Perry Graham: I certainly shall, but I wanted to point out to my hon. friend the l eason why I pursued him till Ihe committed the Government to the policy of appointing returned soldiers. His colleagues are not carrying out that policy.


John Dowsley Reid: There may be some explanation of that case.


Mr. TURGEON:: In order to make sure, as my hon. friend from South Renfrew (Mr. Graham) has done in the case of Montreal, I might call the attention of the Minister of Customs to the fact that there is a vacancy at present at the most important port in the county of Gloucester, caused by the death

of Mr. John J. Harrington, late collector of customs at Bathurst, who died a few weeks ago. So far the position has not been filled. I would understand that it would be in order to appoint a returned soldier from the field of battle. I am willing to say that the Bathurst collector, although appointed by my hon. friend, was a very good officer, a good citizen, a good father and a man of high character, whose death caused regret to every citizen of Bathurst. - The officer who was dismissed in 1911 by my hon. friend is to-day a minister of the Crown in the new Liberal Government in the province of New Brunswick, and I suppose he owes a debt of gratitude to my hon. friend for his dismissal at that time. However, we shall see what the course of the minister will be when a returned soldier is available for that position. I admit that there is not among any of the returned soldiers to-day one who would be qualified for that position. Unfortunately, of those who have gone from my county, more have made the supreme sacrifice on the field of honour than have come back with laurels either wounded or incapacitated. Meanwhile I would like to make sure, as my hon. friend made sure in regard to Montreal, that I can depend upon it that my hon. friend will defer action until a returned soldier qualified to fill the position comes back. There is more than one man at the front to-day who is qualified for that position and any :ne of these men, when he come1 back, will be able to fid the position with honour and ability. There is one very young man who has returned with honours won upon the field of battle but he has not been offered the position. Of course, he happens to be the son of the dismissed officer who is now a minister of the Crown in the province of New Brunswick. My hon. friend is not aware, perhaps of all these details. Yet, in order to make sure as to what might take place in the future I want to secure the promise of my hon. friend that if he should be pressed by the politicians of Gloucester county, he will resist their demand until a returned soldier, able to fill the position, shall come back and that he will get the position.


John Dowsley Reid: I would have liked the hon. member (Mr. Turgeon) to have told the whole story about Bathurst as I recollect it. From the speech of the hon. member one might infer that in case there was a vacancy at Bathurst I would not appoint a returned soldier. I do not know whether

I am right or not, but is it a fact, or is it not, that there has been a vacancy at Bathurst and that I did insist upon a returned soldier who was not a resident of the county at all getting that position?


Onésiphore Turgeon: Yes, but I referred to the collectorship. That is the assistant.


John Dowsley Reid: Why did not the hon. member, in making these few remarks, explain the whole case because this goes to show that I am following up that policy right in the county in which he lives?


George Perry Graham: Only with reference to
the sub positions; he was speaking of the collectorship.


John Dowsley Reid: What I am objecting to is
that the hon. member was casting doubt in the minds pf the members of this House and. the people of this country as to whether I was adopting that policy in his own county. Yet, when there was a vacancy in Bathurst, right in his own county, I appointed a returned soldier who did not live in the county. The gentleman that he refers to was n.ot in the county at the time of the vacancy and I brought in a returned soldier from another county who had done duty in France, who was wounded and who is occupying that position in Bathurst at the present time. There you see that I was trying , tp follow out that policy in the county which the hon. gentleman represents. As far as the man to which the hon. gentleman refers is concerned, I have not heard anything of him and he has not made any application. I would like to ask the hon. member if his attention has been drawn to the fact that as soon as the Liberal party came into power in New Brunswick they dismissed every Conservative official in the whole province. One of the first was the sheriff right in the town of Bathurst who, as the hon. gentleman knows, was one of the best officials in the county, a man that they could not say one word against, a man who bad a son, or several sons at the front. Yet, they dismissed him without any investigation or anything else and they have not appointed a returned soldier to the position in New Brunswick. As far as* the appointment of a returned soldier to a position in New Brunswick, the situation is this:	Here is an official
who had been 15 or 16 years in office, a man that no one in the county could point his finger at, a man who took no part in political matters and yet he was hoisted out of his office the minute the Liberal Government came into power.
They did not appoint a returned soldier to the position. I have been asked, in view of the fact that no soldier, as the hon. members says, has returned from the front, in view of the many men who have gone from that county and the possibility of men coming back who might be injured to such an extent that they were not fit for any other occupation, a man with an arm or a leg off, or in view of the fact that the sons of this man who has been dismissed as sheriff of the county will probably return, perhaps invalided, whether I would not appoint him temporarily to that position until one of his sons came home or until some other man came home who would be able to fill it. This has been urged especially because of the fact that the Liberal government have taken the livelihood of a man 60 or 65 years of age by dismissing him in that way. I have refrained from appointing a returned soldier but in view of the fact that the Liberal Government in New Brunswick are dismissing officials without one word of warning, instead of following up the policy that I have been following with regard to the appointment of returned soldiers, I would ask my hon. friend, now that the matter has come up, if he thinks it would be an unfair thing to allow a man to act temporarily while his sons are at the front or until one of his sons, or some other man, comes back who is qualified to fill that position.


Onésiphore Turgeon: As to the appointments made by the Liberal Government of New Brunswick, I have no responsibility, although I will say to my hon. friend that if the son of that sheriff who has been dismissed, as he says, by the Liberal Government, were to return the first of them all, I would be in harmony with the minister for his appointment. Had he not mentioned the appointment of an assistant to the Customs Department of a returned soldier from outside of the county, I would not have mentioned this, because I had in mind simply the ensuring of the position now vacant for a returned soldier. As to the political conduct of the ex-sheriff, the man who has been dismissed, my hon. friend says he has never been an active politician. May I contradict him in that respect? I say that he has been a very active politician, active against myself in every election* since he was appointed until the last election when, a few days before, seeing the approach of a change of Government, he became very decent and quiet. At the same time if his son were to return-and' I

have a great respect for his son whom I know perfectly well-if he would be the first to return wounded or incapacitated and my hon. friend should be in power and give him the position, I would be in harmony with him.


John Dowsley Reid: I will give it to him anyway, whether you are ot not.


Onésiphore Turgeon: All right, we might give it to him. At the same time I want to say that I wanted to secure from the minister, after my hon. friend's reference to the postmastership in St. Thomas, where no doubt there are a great many returned soldiers, some guarantee for one of the returned soldiers in my county; and if the son of the dismissed sheriff should return, I would be satisfied with him or any one else the minister might appoint.


John Dowsley Reid: Would the hon. gentleman
consider it fair that, pending the return of his son who is now at the front, the dismissed Sheriff should be appointed temporarily to the position so that the son would have it on his return? Would the hon. gentleman agree to that?


Onésiphore Turgeon: I would agree to that.


John Dowsley Reid: You will agree to appointing the son?


Onésiphore Turgeon: Yes.


John Dowsley Reid: Then I will do it to-morrow.


Onésiphore Turgeon: He has a spn at the
front, and if he is appointed temporarily I accede to that.


John Dowsley Reid: If the hon. member agrees to that, I do not know his name, but tomorrow I will appoint him collector of customs and his father will go on and act until he returns.


George Perry Graham: See how quickly my hon. friend can change. Less than three minutes ago he was going to make the appointment whether my hon. friend agreed or not, and in less than three minutes he bases his appointment of the soldier on the agreement of my hon. friend. I wanted to ask the minister about conditions in his own constituency. The regulations to which I refer may perhaps come under some other department, possibly the Department of Immigration, but as the minister told us that he was the patronage committee in his own riding, he will understand the matter. I received a letter to-day saying that the international regulations under which men 
of military age are not allowed to cross between the United States and Canada were practically ignored between Prescott and Ogdensburg, down where my hon. friend lives. I know there is a good deal of traffic there, but I can scarcely believe that the situation can be as described in the letter I have received. If it is, then there is one port in Canada where the young men of Canada can practically go without restraint to the other side of the line. I should like an explanation from the minister.


John Dowsley Reid: I should like to say that I read an item that has appeared in the press that I had gone to Prescott-


George Perry Graham: I did not see that, it was some letters to me.


John Dowsley Reid: When I returned home on Saturday morning I had to leave for New York on Saturday afternoon, and when I went to the ferry dock there was a complaint there that those wishing to go across the river between the ages of 18 and 45 had serious difficulty with one of the immigration officials who had interpreted the Order in Council, or the instructions, to mean that' no one between the ages of 18 and 45 was to be allowed to cross. The other two officers interpreted the regulations as meaning that they were to be allowed to cross if they had the proper permits. The difficulty arose when the officer who thought that there was a total prohibition of crossing by those of military age was on duty. I explained to the one official that the interpretation of the others was the correct interpretation, and that unless the officers really felt that a man was trying to get away out of the country to escape military service, any man having the proper permit should be allowed to cross, as the Government desired to cause the least possible inconvenience. After that I understand there was no difficulty.


George Perry Graham: Do the photographs of these men accompany the permits?


John Dowsley Reid: Not in any that I saw.


George Perry Graham: Of course, the difficulty about the permits without a photograph need not be explained.


John Dowsley Reid: The difficulty was more with the local traffic. Men were coming from Brockville, Cardinal, Kemptville and other places back in the country, really between the two counties, and that is where the trouble arose. There did not seem to be any general complaint. I asked the customs officers if they had noticed any trouble,

and they said there was no difficulty at all. I think the whole trouble was there, as at many other ports, that the o.fficers were a little afraid, that they had not yet become accustomed to the working of the regulations. I do not anticipate trouble.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: The minister has referred to the (payment of overtime to customs officials. What are the official hours for customs officers in country ports', and do the same hours apply to all country ports?


John Dowsley Reid: The regular hours are from
9 to 5. The officials are given overtime pay for work performed outside of those hours.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: What is the rate for overtime pay?


John Dowsley Reid: Thirty cents an hour.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Would it not be better for the minister to do away with this overtime system and increase the salaries to provide for the extra work done?


John Dowsley Reid: This system has been in
force for a long time. I really do not think that the officials would favour the suggestion made by my horn, friend. In my town the men go on at 7 in the morning and work until 5 or 6. The ferry boats run until 12 midnight, and the men take turns in doing the overtime work. I think, then fore, that it would not toe practicable to place the salaries at such a high amount as to provide for the overtime. The salaries, including overtime, run from $1,200 to $1,300 per annum; the hours are not very long. If we abolished the overtime altogether, we should have to increase the staff, because ordinarily the men would be ev ployed only during the regular hours. In the town of Prescott about $2,000 a year is paid toy way of overtime. Ilf two more men were put on to take up the work otherwise done outside the regular hours, you would simply be taking it from the other men. Altogether, the system works very well.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: What I suggest is that instead of paying the men extra for overtime, a fair wage he arrived at and paid as a stated salary. The .adoption of such a system would save much bookkeeping and much timekeeping. I do not know whether or not the men keep their own time, but if they do, they are all human, and they are apt to be not very strict as to the length of their overtime service. I should think that it would save much
bother and be muoh more satisfactory generally if the overtime payments were abolished and the salaries increased tp coveT work after hours.


John Dowsley Reid: The men would not work overtime if they received a regular salary; they would work from 9 to 5. As I say, the system has been very satisfactory, and I should not like to make any change without consulting the officials and going into the matter very thoroughly.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: The minister did not answer my question as to whether the system of overtime applies to all ports.


John Dowsley Reid: It applies to ahy port where a man is employed outside the regular hours.


Mr. COPP:: In his anxiety to attack the governement in the province of New Brunswick because of a question asked by the member for Gloucester, the minister a few moments ago charged the present Government of the province of New Brunswick with discharging every Conservative official in the province. For the purpose, I suppose, of offering an excuse for the manner in which he has carried on the affairs of his department in the interests of his own party, he makes this assertion against the Government of the province of New Brunswick. May I ask my hon. friend upon what information he bases the assertion which he has made, and what were the names of the persons dismissed?


John Dowsley Reid: That report has been in circulation since the present provincial Government came into power. The hon. gentleman can get sufficient evidence of that without asking me for it.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The minister has not any.


Arthur Bliss Copp: I may tell the minister that I have not any such information.


John Dowsley Reid: 
Arthur Bliss Copp: Yes, and I was there during the election. I had occasion to be at different polling booths in two different counties. At one of the places I attended a number of officials stood at the polls and worked against the government-and they are still holding office. The only evidence my hon. friend gave of officials being dismissed in the province of New Brunswick was the statement concerning the sheriff of the county of Gloucester. I may tell my



hon. friend that no sheriff has been dismissed in the province of New Brunswick since the election. The sheriffs in that province are appointed annually. In some cases the old sheriffs are reappointed; in other cases they are replaced because they have outlived their usefulness. During an election in the province of New Brunswick the registry office in a certain county was closed up to ordinary business and used as a Tory consulting room on election day. On another occasion a sheriff of a certain county established a polling booth in the Conservative committee room. My hon. friend had no justification for making the charge that he did against the Government of the province of New Brunswick, because the sheriff to whom he referred was not reappointed to office after his term had expired.


George Perry Graham: That matter has been
settled by the minister appointing to the office a gentleman recommended by the hon. member for Gloucester. I was going to suggest to the minister that as at least some of us have worked very faithfully, we should pass the first item, although it is a large one, and then adjourn. Of course, we shall be allowed to discuss almost any matter on the other items?


John Dowsley Reid: Certainly.
Progress reported.
On the motion of Hon. Mr. Rogers for the adjournment of the House.


George Perry Graham: What business shall we take up to-morrow?


Robert Rogers: Whatever Bills are on the Order Paper and then we will go into Supply.


George Perry Graham: Shall we take up all the Bills that are on the Order Paper?


Robert Rogers: All that are ready.


William Pugsley: There is a Bill intituled The Military Service Act, 1917.


Robert Rogers: I cannot say as to that.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the House adjourned at 10]45 p.m.
Thursday, May 31, 1917.