1917-06-11

REPORTS AND PAPERS.

[Stage Direction]
Copy of Order in Council with reference to regulations governing the payment of separation allowances to the Royal Canadian Navy.-Hon. J. D. Hazen.


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. Sir ROBERT BORDEN (Prime Minister) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 75, respecting military service.

He said: Mr. Speaker, as the Bill which I am presenting to the House has created a good deal of public interest, I shall, by your leave, make a somewhat fuller explanation of its provisions and of the circumstances out of which it has arisen than would ordinarily be the case on such a motion.
Let me first ask the attention of the House to the events of nearly three years ago. It is unnecessary at this juncture to enter into any prolonged examination of the causes of this war or of the purposes for which it was undertaken. Beyond question it was the aim and intention of Germany to assassinate Belgium's rights and liberties; to crush France; to make eventual peace with Russia; to have our Empire stand aside, so that it might afterwards meet the fate of France and of Belgium in order that Germany might dominate the world. For this purpose Germany made a most intense and careful preparation during nearly half a century, and she proceeded to carry out her purpose by methods so barbarous and revolting that humanity stood aghast.
As to Canada's determination, there was never one moment's doubt. Our nation was united in a common purpose. Men of all parties expressed a most resolute and vehement determination to carry the war to victory and to an abiding peace. It was realized by all that the future of civilization and democracy was' at stake.
Within six weeks after the war broke out,
33.000	men, fully armed, well trained, and thoroughly equipped, were ready to depart from our shores. Our authoijzed forces were increased by 30,000 men on the 7th day of November, 1914; they were increased to
150.000	in all on the 8th day of July, 1915, and to 250,000 on the 30th day of October, 1915.
In 1915 and also in 1916, many delegations from all parts of the country came to Ottawa and waited upon the Government for the purpose of urging compulsory military service. They emphasized with very great force the disadvantages of a voluntary system and the need of more men. I realized then and I explained to them possible difficulties, some of which I communicated privately to the leading members of these various delegations.
On the fir§t day of January, 1916, I issued a message to the Canadian people in which I announced that Canada's authorized forces would be increased to 500,000 men. In that message I used these words:

By the greatness of the need our future efforts must be measured.
The necessary Order in Council was passed on January 12, 1916, and it was laid on the table of the House. No criticism was made in Parliament of the action which the Government thus took; no motion was moved against the Government's action, and the necessary Parliamentary appropriations were voted unanimously. In many parts of the country my message was construed as a pledge. It was not issued as a pledge; it was the authorization of a further increase in the Canadian Expeditionary Force; but it has been deemed to be a pledge made on behalf of the Government and the people of this country, and I am content so to regard it.
There was a splendid response to that appeal; in three and one-half months more than a hundred thousand men enlisted. The need as it then appeared seemed to be served. But later on it became apparent that the struggle would exceed all anticipations. A second division had gone to the front; then a third went, and finally a fourth. The need of reinforcements became greater, while the recruiting during the summer and autumn of 1916 became less. In the autumn of 1916, I made a tour of six provinces of this Dominion in aid of National Service. I was accompanied by the Director General of National Service, and the duty of service was emphasized to vast audiences whose response was inspiring.
After my return a delegation of representatives of organized labour waited upon me, their mission being one of inquiry with regard to the National Service cards, and they demanded from me a pledge that under no circumstances would compulsory military service be enforced in this country. I gave them a reply on the spot, and I followed that up by a letter which was puli' lished in the press and which bears the date of December 27, 1916. That letter contains the following passage:
You have asked for an assurance that under no circumstances will conscription he undertaken or carried out. As I stated to you at our interview, I must decline to give any such assurance. I hope that conscription may not he necessary, but if it should prove the only effective method to preserve the existence of the State and of the institutions and liberties which we enjoy, I should consider it necessary and I should not hesitate to act accordingly.
Early in February, 1917, I left for England, and in March last I saw at the front a Canadian Army Corps of four divisions, instead of the one division which I had seen in July, 1915. Our forces in France at that time numbered about 130,000 men,
including all arms of the service. It is manifest to every one that four divisions require four times as many repruits as one, and at the present time the recruiting is not adequate to the need, as I shall show later on.
There are only two alternatives-to let our forces dwindle from four divisions to three, from three to two, and perhaps from two to one, or, to bring aid by other means than an appeal for voluntary service. That is the problem which confronts Canada today.
Let me say a word about the general conditions of the war. Hon. gentlemen, of course, will understand that I may not speak too freely. The effort of the Empire has been wonderful; the effort of our own Dominion has been notable. But no effort is sufficient unless it assures victory, liberty, security and peace. I am in a position to assure the House and the country that the need of reinforcements is urgent, insistent and imperative. The effort of Russia is paralyzed for the present-no one knows for how long. The effort of the United States is only beginning. It is Germany's hope to win the war before the power of the United States can become effective; more than that, it is her confident belief; for otherwise she never would have risked war with that great power, or staked everything on the (Submarine campaign 'and her ability to hold her lines East and West while her undersea boats should starve Britain into submission.
The crying need is for physically fit and thoroughly trained troops, chiefly infantry. The methods by which this war is carried on are perhaps more thorough, and .the system by which men are provided and trained for the front and for the various arms of the service is probably more intricate and complex than any of us understand who have not looked carefully into such matters. I have before me a form of return which is used for the purpose of showing the classification, or categorization as it is called, of the Canadian Expeditionary Force. I find at the top:	Category
"A" with four classes; category "B" with three classes; category "C" with three classes; category " D " with three classes, and category " E."
Category " A " includes all men fit for general service. Class I, includes all men actually fit in all respects for despatch to France. Class II includes men who will be fit for Class I as soon as they are trained. Class III includes casualties who should
[Stage Direction]
be ifit for Class I as soon as they are hardened and trained. Class IV includes men under nineteen who should be fit for Class I as soon as they reach that age.
Category "B" includes those fit for service in France but not fit for general service, that is, not fit for service in the trenches at the front. Class I includes those who may give service in garrison or provisional units. Class II includes those who are fit for service in labour and construction units or for other outdoor employment. Class III includes those who are suitable for sedentary work only.
Category "C" includes those who are fit for service in the United Kingdom only. Class I takes in those who are fit for service in garrison or provisional units. Class II includes those who are fit for service in labour and construction units or for other outdoor employment. Class III includes those, who are fit for sedentary work only.
Category "D" takes in all those who are temporarily unfit for service in categories "A" "B" or "C," but are likely to become fit within six months. Meanwhile they include those who are assigned to Class I, command depots. Class II is not applicable to the Canadian Expeditionary Force in England. Class III includes those who are awaiting dental or medical treatment.
Category "E" includes only those who are awaiting their discharge and are not fit for any service.
I should explain to the House that this is the system of classification, and these are the categories used by the War Office in dealing with like matters in the British medical treatment.
Let us look for a moment at another classification. I have given the classification by fitness, and I now come to the classification by service. I look at the side of this form and I see at least 24 divisions with perhaps 15 to 20 subdivisions, indicating the extended and comprehensive nature of the services and the great variety of purposes for which men are required in the organization of a modern army.
The divisions and subdivisions are as follows:

[Stage Direction]
Staffs-
General.
Administrative.
Departmental.
Cavalry.
Mounted Rifles.
Artillery-
Horse and field.
Heavy.

Artillery-Con.
Siege.
Trench mortar.
Anti-aircraft.
Machine-Gun Corps-
Machine-gun companies.
Motor machine-gun brigade and batteries. Engineers-
Field companies and troops.
Arn y troops companies.
Tunnelling companies.
Signal companies and troops.
Cable sections.
Motor air-line section.
Wireless section.
Infantry.
Cyclists.	.
Pioneers.
Army Service Corps-
Divisional trains.
Supply Columns.
Supply detachmer.1 s.
Salvage companies.
Ammunition parks.
Ammunition sub-parks.
Field butcheries.
Field bakeries.
Depot units of supply.
Reserve parks.
Army Medic al Corps-
Field ambulances.
Casualty clearing stations.
Mobile laboratories.
Sanitary sections.
Depots medical stores.
General, stationary and other hospitals. Hospital ship.
Army Dental Corps.
Army Veterinary Corps, i Mobile sections.
Veterinary hospitals.
Forestry Corps.
Railway Troops.
Railway battalions.
Construction battalions.
Entrenching Battalions.	,
Labour Battalions.
Army Pay Corps.
Army Postal Corps.	*
Ordnance Corps.
Military Police.
Training Establishments, various.
Records Office.
Miscellaneous.
Hon. gentlemen will thus realize that a very thorough system is required, not only in reference to the fitness of the men for any service whatever, but also in respect of the various services to which they may ib-e allotted in -ease of their fitness for any. Now I come for a moment, in view of that, to some statistics. I want hon. gentlemen in this House and the country to realize that the most important need at the front to-day, both in pur force and in other forces, is for men of Category " A " Class I; that is, infantry who are able to go into the trenches, who are physically fit and thoroughly trained. Frpm the classification which I have already read, hon. gentlemen will understand that only a moderate proportion of enlisted troops can

21t!7
be brought within that category and class.
I should further emphasize this consideration; that in the enlistments which have taken place during the past year, and which I shall recount in a moment, a very considerable number of men have taken service in GRailway Construction iand Forestry battalions. These battalions serve a most useful and important purpose, but the number of men available for combatant service in Category " A " is necessarily cut down by enlistment in Railway Construction and Forestry units. The total enlistment during the year ending May 31, 1917, was 85,306. Of course, only a portion of these men were fit for Category " A ", and as I have already pointed out, a considerable number enlisted for Railway Construction iand Forestry service. During the same year our casualties amounted to 75,492. Our total casualties since the war began amount to 99,639. During April and May we enlisted 1'1,790 men and during these same two months our casualties were 23,939. During the next seven months we need enforcements to the number of at least 70,000 in order to keep four divisions in the field, and to keep five divisions in the field we need 84,000 men, in both cases principally infantry. Continued offensive operations, such as those of April and May, might increase this number, and if the offensive continues it is not too much to say that we must expect this.
What is the conclusion I have drawn from all this? It is, as I have said before, that reinforcements must be obtained or the divisions must dwindle; there is no alternative. The reinforcements now available will last for only a few months, the iprenife number of which, for military reasons, I am not at liberty to state. We all are proud that Canada has played a splendid and notable part in this war. The achievements of her troops have placed her in the very forefront of the nations, and the question before the House and the country to-day is this:	Is Canada content to
relax her efforts in the most critical period of a war which concerns her heritage, her .statue, and her liberty? I am confident that the answer of the House and the country will be the same, namely that Canada cannot and must not relax her effort.
It seems to me there is something more than this to be taken into account. Is there not, as I have already said in this [House, an appeal from the men at the front? They have answered the call, they have given glorious service, they have put
aside all material considerations; duty .alone has been their ideal. Unconscious of every thing other than the supreme task before them, I know from my personal experience that they cannot realize the thought ithat their country which so summoned them (to her service will be content to desert and humiliate them. I bring f-om that splendid manhood of Canada at the front an *earnest and thrilling message that we shall stand beside them in. the stress and welter <of this struggle, and bring them such support that the effort and sacrifice which have .been consecrated to this supreme task shall not be in vain. When Canada called them to the colours her honour was pledged to this, and I shall do my best to see that the pledge is fulfilled. I never will be res *sponsible for its violation.
Returning on May 14th, I announced on May 18th that the need must be met by applying a principle which, for forty-nine years, has been on the statute book of Canada. I repeat that: There is no principle of compulsion in the Bill which I have presented to this House, except the principle that has remained on the statute book of Canada for forty-nine years. Some people afflicted with a diseased imagination have asserted that I took my present course at the request or dictation of the British Government. No more absolute falsehood was ever uttered by human lips. The subject was never discussed between myself and any member of the British Government; if there had been any such suggestion from them I for one would not have tolerated it. The Government, Parliament and people of Canada are the only authorities that can deal with or determine questions such as those which are embodied in the Bill now presented to this House.
The principle of compulsory service in this Dominion was first enacted in 1868, under a government in which Sir George Etienne Cartier was Minister of Militia and Defence. It- was re-enacted with a slight change in form, but no change in meaning, in 1904, by the Government of my right hon. friend (Sir Wilfrid Lauxier). In order that there may be no question about this, it is appropriate that I should give a short review of what took place in 1868 and should also *deal with the amendment made in 1904.
By tihe Militia Act of 1868, introduced by Sir George Etienne Cartier, it was enacted-(section 4)-as follows:
4. The militia shall consist of all the male inhabitants of Canada, of the age of eighteen years and upwards, and under sixty-not exempted or disqualified by law, and being British subjects by birth or naturalization;
[Stage Direction]


but Her Majesty may require all the male inhabitants of the Dominion, capable of bearing arms, to serve in case of a Devfie en Masse.
By section 5 it was provided that the male population so liable to serve in the militia, should be divided into four classes. This enactment is still in the statute book.
Section 16, subsection 3, provides that:
The enrolment shall be held) to be an embodiment of all the militiamen enrolled, and shall render them liable to serve under the provisions of this Act, unless exempt by law.
Section 61 enacted as follows:
Her Majesty may call out the militia, or any part thereof, for actual service, either within or without the Dominion, at any time, whenever it appears advisable so to do by reason of war, invasion, or insurrection, or danger of any of them; and the militiamen, when so called out for actual service, shall continue to serve for at least one year from the date of their being called out for actual service, if required so to do, or for any longer period which Her Majesty may appoint.
This Bill gave rise to discussion in Parliament, as was natural. On the 12th May, 1868, on a motion to go into committee on the Bill, Mr. Dorion moved, in amendment, seconded by Mr. Mackenzie:
What it be an instruction to the committee to consider the following resolution:	"That in
the opinion of this House the volunteer system is of proved efficiency, and specially adapted to the spirit and circumstances of the people, and is capable of supplying a more efficient and available force than that proposed to be substituted by this Bill; and it is therefore desirable to amend the same so as to make provision
[Stage Direction]
1.	For the proper maintenance and encouragement of the volunteer organization;
2.	For the drilling of the officers of the ordinary militia;
3.	That the ordinary militia shall not be actually called out by conscription, save in case of necessity."
On division, this amendment was rejected by a vote of 100 to 41.
It must be apparent, therefore, that the whole question of compulsory service was taken into consideration by the founders of Confederation in almost the first session of this Parliament, and that then it was decided, once for all, that for the defence of this country, and whether within or out of Canada, the people of this country should be subject to compulsory military service. And this has remained the law of the country from the day it was enacted in 1868, and it is the law of the land to-day.
Now, let us look for a moment at the provisions of the Militia Act, which was passed in its present form in 1904, and which is now known as chapter 41 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1906. I will quote section 10 and also section 69 of that Act:
10. All the male inhabitants of Canada of the age of eighteen years and upwards, and under
ISir Robert Borden.]
sixty, not exempt or disqualified by law, and being British subjects, shall be liable to service in the Militia; provided that the Governor General may require all the male inhabitants of Canada, capable of bearing arms, to serve in the case of a lev&e en masse.
69. The Governor in Council may place the militia, or any part thereof, on active service anywhere in Canada, and also beyond Canada, for the defence thereof, at any time when it appears advisable so to do by reason of emergency.
Hon. members will observe that there is a slight difference ih the provisions of section 69 from the corresponding section of the Act of 1868, that is, section 61. There was some debate in 1904 upon that change, and to this I will come a littje later. Meantime, I desire to point out that this enactment is based upon the principle, which is as old as the principle of self-government, that while the state owes to its citizens certain duties, the citizen also owes corresponding duties to the state. To the citizen, the state assures protection and security of his person and property, the enforcement of law and orderly government. To the state, each citizen owes a duty of service, .and the highest duty of all is the obligation to assist in defending the rights, the institutions and the liberties of his country. I desire to express my profound conviction that there never has been, and there never will be, an occasion when that duty could be more manifest, more urgent, or more imperative than at the present time.
It may be asked: Why is this law necessary if such provision already exists in the Militia Act? The answer is very simple. We have sent 326,000 men overseas in the Canadian Expeditionary Force besides those who have gone to serve in the Allied Armies. The Militia Act provides that the selection shall be by ballot and in no other way. The Government is convinced that such a method of selection would be unwise, and even disastrous, under present conditions and having regard to the number of men required. We propose not to change or enlarge the compulsory principle, but merely to provide that selection shall not be made by ballot, that is, by blind chance. We are convinced that the selection should be based upon an intelligent consideration of the country's needs and conditions. We must take into account the necessities of agriculture, of commerce, and of industry. Those who in their present occupations are rendering better service to the state than by enrolment in the Canadian Expeditionary Force must not be selected for military service. There is need for men at the front; there is also need for men at home. The

nation's activities essential for winning the war must be maintained. Thus, the only new feature proposed is in the method of selection. The compulsory clauses in this Bill are precisely of the same character, and based upon the same principles, as those which have been in force in this country since 1868.
It is further asked why the new method of selection could not have been accomplished by an amendment to the Militia Act. We considered that very carefully. It would have been necessary to amend, perhaps, a dozen or a score of clauses, so many at least that the legislation would have been less effective, less clear and more confused. The same course has been taken in Great Britain and in New Zealand.
The provisions oif the Bill have been very carefully considered. We desire that they shall be most attentively studied. I do not dou'bt that on some matters there may be room for argument and suggestion. We are prepared to listen most carefully to all suggestions, provided they are reasonable and do not affect the efficiency of the measure.
The first provision to which I ask the attention of the House is section 13, subsection 4, of the Bill, which provides that the reinforcements to be raised under this Bill shall not exceed 100,000 men, between the ages of 20 and 45. The number of men in Canada between these ages, by the census of 1911, and other information of a like character, in respect to the possibility of raising 50,000 or 100,000 men, will be communicated to the House on the second reading. I hope that the information can be presented to the House in -a form which will carry conviction. It is certainly apparent to me, from the information which I have already obtained, that there ought to be no difficulty in providing reinforcements of at least 100,000 men, and probably a number even in excess of that. Before proceeding with 'the explanation of section 1, perhaps I should give to the House the recital, or preamble^ on which the Bill is based. It is as follows:-
Whereas by section ten of the Militia Act, chapter forty-one of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1906, it is enacted as follows:-
"All the male inhabitants of Canada, of the age of eighteen years and upwards, and under sixty, not exempt or disqualified by law, and being British subjects, shall be liable to service in the Militia; Provided that the Governor General may require all the male inhabitants of Canada, capable of bearing arms, to serve in the case of a levde en masse."
And whereas by section sixty-nine of the said Act it is further enacted as follows:-
I40i
"The Governor in Council may place the Militia, or any part thereof, on active service anywhere in Canada, and also beyond Canada, for the defence thereof, at any time when it appears advisable so to do by reason of emergency."
And whereas by the said Act it is further enacted that, if at any time enough men do not volunteer to complete the quota required, the men so liable to serve shall be drafted by ballot;
And whereas to maintain and support the Canadian Expeditionary Force now engaged in active service overseas for the defence and security of Canada, the preservation of the Empire and of human liberty, it is necessary to provide reinforcements for such Expeditionary Force;
And whereas enough men do not volunteer to provide such reinforcements;
And whereas, by reason of the large number of men who have already left agricultural and industrial pursuits in Canada to join such Expeditionary Force as volunteers, and of the necessity of sustaining under such conditions the productivity of the Dominion, it is expedient to secure the men still required, not by ballot as provided in the Militia Act, but by selective draft.
That is the preamble, or recital, upon which the Bill is based. The only important part of section 1 to which I need call attention is that which provides that the Act will be under the administration of the Minister of Justice. It will be under hid administration for the reason that there are to be inquiries as to selection and as to exemption or otherwise, and it is not desirable that these inquiries should be conducted by the department which is to take charge of the men when they are once enrolled. These matters are rather of a judicial character until the question of exemption or liability is finally determined. Therefore, the administration of the Act is placed under the Department of Justice.
Section 2 deals with the application of the Bill. No change of'any importance is made. The section provides that:-
(1)	Every male British subject who comes within one of the classes described in section three of this Act, and who,-[DOT]
(a)	is ordinarily resident in Canada; or
(b)	has been at any time since the fourth day of August, 1914, resident in Canada,
shall be liable to be called out as hereinafter provided on active service in the Canadian Expeditionary" Force for the defence of Canada, either in or beyond Canada, unless he
(a)	Comes within the exceptions set out
in the Schedule; or	.
(b)	reaches the age of forty-five' before the class or subclass to which he belongs, ,as described in section three is called out.
Such service shall be for the duration of the present war and of demobilization after the conclusion of the war.
(2)	Nothing in this Act shall prevent any man from voluntarily enlisting in the Canadian Expeditionary tForce, so long as voluntary enlistment in such Force is authorized.
[Stage Direction]
Section 3 deals with the various classes into whidh men 'between the ages of 20 and 45, both inclusive, are divided. It is as follows:-
3.	(1) The men who are liable to be called out shall consist of ten classes described as
follows:-'	,
Class 1.-Those who have attained the age of twenty years and were born not earlier than the year 1894 and are unmarried, or are widowers but have no child.
Class 2.-Those who were born In the years 1889 to 1893, both inclusive, and are unmarried, or are widowers but have no child.
Class 3.-Those who were born In the years 1883 to 1888, both inclusive, and are unmarried, or are widowers but have no child.
Class 4.-Those who have attained the age of twenty years and were born not earlier than the year 1894 and are married, or are widowers who have a child or children.
Class 5.-Those who were born in the years 1889 to 1893, both inclusive, and are married, or are widowers who have a child or children.
Class 6.-Those who were born in the years 1883 to 1888, both inclusive, and are married, or are widowers who have a child or children.
Class 7.-Those who were born in the years 1876 to 1882, both inclusive, and are unmarried, or are widowers who have no child.
Class 8.-Those who were born in the years 1876 to 1882, both inclusive, and are married, or are widowers who have a child or children.
Class 9.-Those who were born in the years 1872 to 1875, both inclusive, and are unmarried, or are widowers who have no child.
Class 10.-Those who ~*re born in the years 1872 to 1875, both inclusive, are married, or are widowers who have a child or children.
(2)	For the purposes of this section, any man married after the eleventh day of June, 1917, shall be deemed to be unmarried.
(3)	Any class, except Class 1, shall include men who are tranferred thereto from another class as hereinafter provided, and men who have come within Class 1 since the previous class was called out.
(4)	The order in which the classes are described in this section shall be the order in which they may be called out on active service, provided the Governor in Council may divide any class into subclasses, in which case the subclasses shall be called out in order of age, beginning with the youngest.
For example, if it appeared to the Government that the calling out of Classes I, 2 and 3 might yield a larger number of men than the forces authorized by this Act, it would be possible for the Government to divide Class 3 into sub-classes, so that the number to be called out should _ not exceed the number authorized by the Act.
I now proceed to the next section:
4.	(1) The Governor in Council may from time to time by proclamation call out on active service as aforesaid for the defence of Canada, either in Canada or beyond Canada, any class or subclass of men described in section three and all men within the class or subclass so called out shall, from the date of such proclamation, be deemed to be soldiers enlisted in the
TSir Robert Borden.]
Military Forces of Canada and subject to military law for the duration of the present war, and of demobilization thereafter, save as hereinafter provided.
(2)	Men so called out shall report and shall be placed on active service in the Canadian Expeditionary Force as may be set out in such proclamation or in regulations, but until so placed on active service, shall be deemed to be on leave of absence without pay.
(3)	Any man by or in respect of whom an application for exemption is made as hereinafter provided, shall, so long as such application or any appeal in connection therewith is pending and during the currency of any exemption granted him, be deemed to be on leave of absence without pay.
(4)	Any man who is called out and who, without reasonable excuse, fails to report as aforesaid or to remain on active service where placed shall be guilty, according to the circumstances, of desertion, or of absenting himself without leave and shall be liable
(a)	To be tried by court-martial and convicted and punished by imprisonment, for a term not exceeding three years, or
(b)	on summary conviction to imprisonment for any term not exceeding three years.
Section 5 reads as follows:
(5)	(1) There shall be established in the manner hereafter set out, the following tribunals :-
(a)	Local Tribunals;
(b)	Appeal Tribunals;
(c)	A Central Appeal Judge.
(2)	Any tribunal may hear evidence on oath or otherwise as it may deem expedient, and for the performance of its duties shall have all the powers vested in a Commissioner under Part 1 of the Inquiries Act.
(3)	The Governor in Council may, upon the recommendation of the Central Appeal Judge, make regulations with respect to the establishment, constitution, functions and procedure of the said tribunals and such regulations may contain provisions for securing uniformity in the application of this Act.
(4)	In so far as provision is not otherwise made, the procedure of the Tribunal shall be such as is determined by the Tribunal.
(5)	No member of any tribunal shall be responsible at law for anything done by him in good faith in the performance of his duties under this Act, and no action shall be taken against any member of a local tribunal or an appeal tribunal in respect of the performance or non-performance of his duties under this Act, except with the written consent of the Central Appeal Judge.
The next section deals with the Local Tribunals which are to be established.
6. (1) The Minister may from time to time by proclamation or otherwise establish local tribunals at such places as he deems necessary and give each an appropriate designation.
Now, as to the constitution of these local tribunals, of whom shall they consist? That question raised a great deal of difficulty, because it was the desire of the Government to adopt a method which would be absolutely above suspicion. We desired to make it clear that the personnel of the

Board was to be selected fairly and independently. Therefore we provided as follows :
(3)	Each local tribunal shall consist of two [DOT] members. One member shall be appointed by a Board of Selection to be established by joint resolution of the Senate and House of Commons ; the other member shall be appointed by the following authority:-
I.	In those provinces in which there are county courts or district courts, the county court judge or district court judge or, if more than one, the senior judge for the county or district in which the local tribunal is established, or when the place at which a local tribunal is to be established is not within the territorial limits of any county court or district court, then by such judge as may be determined by the Minister. '
The county court judge or district judge is to make the appointment. If there is no such judge within the area for which the tribunal is to be established, then one of the members of the tribunal is to be appointed by such county court judge as the minister shall designate for the purpose.
Then there are special provisions for Quebec which read as follows:
II.	In the province of Quebec:-
(a)	In the judicial districts of Montreal and Quebec, any judge of the Superior Court of the province of Quebec who is authorized by the Chief Justice of the said Court or authorized by the judge appointed to perform the duties of Chief Justice in the judicial district.
(b)	In the other judicial districts the judge of the Superior Court of the province of Quebec assigned to the judicial district within which the local tribunal is established.
III.	In the Yukon Territory:-
- The judge of the Territorial Court or the person appointed under the provisions of the Yukon Act to act in place of such judge; and
IV.	In the Northwest Territories:-[DOT]
The Commissioner of the Royal Northwest Mounted Police.
It has been our purpose, therefore, to establish tribunals which shall be constituted by an authority independent of the Government, by persons appointed under the direct authority of Parliament, and by county court judges or district court judges. In Quebec it" will be by judges of the Superior Court, and in the Yukon and Northwest Territories by authorities outside of the Government itself.
It is further provided in the same section:
(4)	(a) The names and addresses of all persons appointed on a local tribunal shall, as may be provided by regulations, be communicated to the minister.
(b) The minister may by telegraph or otherwise appoint one or both members, as the case may be, of any local tribunal, if he has not received, within such period before the tribunal is to sit as may be fixed by regulation, the names and addresses of members duly appointed.
(c)	A vacancy occurring shall be filled by the authority who appointed the member vacating, and if not so filled or if communication of same as aforesaid has not been received by the minister within such period as may be fixed by regulation, the minister may fill such vacancy.
If the authorities, who are empowered by this Act to make the appointment of the local tribunal, ,do not make such appointments, or do not communicate them to the minister, then when the time comes for the work of the tribunals to begin, the minister may make the appointment.
There is also a provision that no person shall, without reasonable excuse, refuse to act when appointed to one of these tribunals. If he refuses to act, he is guilty of an offence, and is liable on summary conviction to a penalty not exceeding $500.
With reference to the appeal tribunals,, the provisions are very simple, and the section reads as follows:
7. The Chief Justice of the court of last resort in each province, or in case of his absence, or failure to act, then a judge of that court designated by the minister, shall establish for such province a sufficient number of appeal tribunals, and shall assign to each such tribunal, one judge of any court of such province, and shall distribute among such tribunals all appeals from and cases stated under subsection 2 of section 10, by local tribunals of which the Registrar has notice, and such appeal tribunals shall severally hear and decide the same.
As to the final tribunal, the Governor in Council may appoint one of the judges of the Supreme Court of Canada to be the Central Appeal Judge.	_
The scheme is to establish Local Tribunals selected by an authority outside of the Government; of these there will be many in each military district. The Appeal Tribunals will . be selected by an authority outside of the Government, but a judicial authority, a member of one of the higher courts in each province, and finally there will be a Central Appeal Judge, who will be the final court of appeal, and who will be selected from the judges of the Supreme Court of Canada.
It has been the purpose of the Government to make these provisions absolutely fair. If any suggestion is made to the Government from the House by which the provisions can be made fairer or more effective, the Government will be glad to listen to such suggestion when the Bill is in committee.
I come, then, to section 10, which deals with appeals; it provides for an appeal from the local tribunal to the appeal tribunal, and from the appeal tribunal to the
[Stage Direction]
central tribunal. These appeals are to be carried out under regulations to be made on the recommendation of the' Central Appeal Judge.
It is also provided by section 10 that the Governor in Council may, on the recommendation of the Central Appeal Judge, appoint-one or more other judges of any superior court to assist the Central Appeal Judge iri the discharge of his duties, and may define their powers. It was thought that there might be more work for the Central Appeal Judge than he could properly attend to, and therefore, this provision was made.
I come now to a very important section, that which concerns exemption. I do not «mnk it is necessary that I should read the whole section; the Bill will shortly be before the members of the House. I shall, however, explain its provisions. It is section 11, and it provides:
(1) At any time before a date to be fixed in the proclamation mentioned in section four, an application may be made, by or in respect of any man in the class or subclass called out by such proclamation, to a local tribunal established in the province in which such man ordinarily resides, for a certificate of exemption on any of the following grounds:-
(a)	That it is expedient in the national interest that the man should, instead of being employed in military service, be engaged in other work in which he is habitually engaged :
That provision, if I remember correctly, is taken from the British Act. It was inserted in that Act at the instancp of representatives of organized labour, who were afraid that otherwise there would be power under the Act to affect prejudicially their interests in certain respects. The list of exemptions continues as follows:	.
(b)	That it is expedient in the national interest that the man should, instead of being employed in military service, be engaged in other work in which he wishes to be engaged and for which he has special qualifications;
That is almost identical in its terms with the corresponding section in the British Act. (Reading):
(c)	That it is expedient in the national interest th it, instead of being employed in military service, he should continue to be educated i oi trained for any work for which he is then being educated or trained;
id) That serious hardship would ensue, if the man were placsd on active service, owing to his exceptional financial or business obligations or domestic position ,
(e)	111 health or infirmity;
(f)	That he cons :isntiously objects to the undertaking of combatant service and is prohibited from so doing by the tenets and articles of faith, in effect at the date of the passing of this Act, of any organized religious denomination existing and well recognized in

Canada at suc.i date, and to which he in good faith belongs;
The Bill goes on to provide that if any of the grounds of the application for exemption are established, a certificate of exemption shall be granted to the applicant. It is further provided that a certificate may be conditional as to time or otherwise and, if granted solely on conscientious grounds, it shall state that exemption is from combatant' service only.
Another provision which I consider very important and appropriate is taken from the British Act, and was regarded in Great Britain as essential in the interests of labour. It is as follows:
No certificate shall be conditional upon a person to whom it is granted continuing in or entering into employment under any specified employer or in any specified place or establishment.
It was feared in Great Britain that certificates .might be granted upon conditions respecting employment which would place employees more or less at the mercy of employers. There was, therefore, in the British Act a direct provision, which we have adopted in this Bill, that no such condition should be inserted in any certificate of exemption.
Another provision in this section makes it an offence to make any false statemeflt or representation before a tribunal or to alter or tamper with a certificate. It is provided also that where a certificate is lost, destroyed or defaced, the tribunal may grant another certificate upon the payment of a small fee.
Section 12 provides that the Governor in Council may make regulations for certain purposes therein mentioned.
Section 13 contains general provisions making applicable the Militia Act, the Army Act and the King's Regulations and Orders for the army in so far as they are applicable and not inconsistent with this Act. This section also empowers the Minister of Militia and Defence to transfer tp the Naval Service any man who has reported for duty under the provisions of this Act.
Sections 14 and 15 are not important; I need not refer to them at the moment. Subsection 1 of section 16 is as follows:
This Act shall come into force on such day after the passing thereof, as the Governor in Council may fix by proclamation.
The only portion of the Act to which I have not directed attention, is the schedule, which sets forth the exceptions. It is as' follows:

Exceptions.
1.	Men who hold a certificate granted under this Act and in force, other than a certificate of exemption from combatant service only.
2.	Members of His Majesty's regular or reserve, or auxiliary forces, as defined by the Army Act.
3.	Members of the military forces raised by the Governments of any of His Majesty's other dominions or by the Government of India.
4.	Men serving in the Royal Navy or in the Royal Marines, or in the Naval Service of Canada, and members of the Canadian Expeditionary Force.
5.	Men who have since August 4,	1914
served in the military or naval forces of Great Britain or her allies in any theatre of actual war and have been honourably discharged
[DOT] therefrom.
6.	Clergy, including members of any recognized order of an exclusively religious character, and ministers of all religious denominations existing in Canada at the date of the passing of this Act.
7.	Those persons ' exempted from military service by Order in Council of August 13, 1873, and by Order in Council of December 6, 1898.
This last provision relates to certain communities of Mennonites and Doukhobors, who came into Canada on the faith of the Orders in Council which I have mentioned. Under these Orders in Council, the settlers referred to were not to be called upon to perform military service. It is absolutely clear that the faith of a country thus pledged must be kept; therefore this exception is introduced into the Bill.
I have endeavoured to give to the House as clearly and as succinctly as possible the main features of this Bill. There are one or two words that I should like to add 'before I sit down. The measure is not intended as provocative or punitive; it is put forward in good faith as the only means of insuring national safety in a great peril. It has been stated in the press that Canadians should not be called upon t,o fight beyond the limits of our territory. But ever since 1868 the law has recognized the obligation of Canadians to fight beyond the limits of our territory, and it recognizes that obligation to-day. I quote again section 69 of the Militia Act:
The Governor in Council may place the militia, or any part thereof, on active service anywhere in Canada, and also beyond Canada, for the defence thereof, at any time when it appears advisable so to do by reason of emergency.	*
It is declared in section 2 of the Militia Act that " emergency " means war, invasion, riot, or insurrection, Teal or -apprehended. Two conditions, therefore, are necessary to the placing of the militia or any part thereof on active service beyond Canada. First, the men must be sent by reason of an emergency; secondly, they must be sent beyond Canada for the defence thereof. Let us consider whether or not those conditions are fulfilled by the present circumstances.
Will any hon. gentleman present deny that there is an emergency within the meaning of the statute? In the midst of the most terrific struggle ever known to history no one will seriously doubt the answer. There is more than an emergency; there is a cataclysm. The greatest of the nations that were once neutral-that great nation to the South of us-has at last been obliged to take up arms to defend its rights, to prevent the domination of militarism, the destruction of liberty and the enslavement of the world. Therefore, I take it for granted that there is no argument open as to the existence of an emergency. Not only is it an emergency; it is the greatest emergency, the greatest peril ever known, the greatest, I believe, that will ever be known in the history of this Dominion.
If it is conceded that there is an emergency, are we not fighting in France and Flanders for the defence of Canada? There are but few members of the House who, in speaking of the war, have not affirmed that truth. Let us look for a moment at Great Britain. We do not know what forces she has in France at the present moment, but w'e do know, from the returns already made public, that her armies have sustained very nearly a million casualties on the soil of France and Belgium. Is Great Britain fighting in France and in Belgium for the defence of her own territory? Yes, she is fighting to free the soil of France and Belgium from the unhallowed footsteps of the enemy, but she is no less truly fighting in defence of her own territory. I do not suppose that any one, looking at the circumstances as they have developed since the 4th day of August, 1914, could doubt that for one moment. What about Canada? When the Canadians on the 22nd day of April 1915, barred the path of the German to Calais, I say that they barred his path also to Halifax, Quebec, St. John and Montreal. From the North Sea to the borders of Switzerland there is a line nearly 500 miles in length, which is being pressed back towards the German frontier. Along that 500 mile line there is a strip of territory of varying width over which this devastating struggle has swayed to and fro. It was once a glorious country with smiling fields, happy villages and prosperous towns. To-day it is the abomination of desolation, a mass of shell-churned mud with no trace of road or street, house.
[Stage Direction]
habitation or village. Even the fruit trees have been cut down and the wells destroyed. The Hun has spared nothing. Thousands of its inhabitants, especially girls and young women, have been- led away by the Germans into a captivity worse than death. Its churches have been destroyed and even its graveyards desecrated. Imagine such scenes in this country of Canada, along a battle line extending from Quebec to Toronto. Where is Canada's first line of defence against such horrors and barbarities? It is in the North Sea, where the Empire's Navy holds back Germany's power, and in the trenches where the Canadians with the other Allied armies are slowly but surely freeing the soil of Prance and of Belgium from the insulting tread of the invader. If that is not our first line of defence, where is it? Who -then will say that the Canadian Expeditionary Force is not fighting for the defence of Canada? Wno will affirm that it is performing a less distinctively national service than the force employed in garrison and outpost duty within our territory? And yet, no one for a moment can deny that the force we have called out for garrison and outpost duty in Canada is acting in the defence of Canada. Is the service that is being performed by the force overseas of a different character? I say not, in my judgment, and in this matter, I, and no one else, am responsible for the judgment to which I must come. Some one speaks of the distance. What security is there in mere distance, considering modem means of communication or attack, not only on the sea, but through the air and under t'he sea? If this war continues for two more years, who shall say that we may not see German aircraft in Canada? Let u« not forget that German submarines crossed the Atlantic nearly a year ago.
In the debate of 1904, upon the Militia Act, as it is now constituted, some exception was taken to the change made at that time in the Act as originally passed by Sir George Etienne Cartier. It was agreed on both sides of the House that, whether the change was desirable or not so far as form was concerned, it made no change in substance. After very careful consideration I agreed to that. The Minister of Militia of the day, Sir Frederick Borden, the Minister of Justice of the day, Sir Charles Fitzpatrick, now Chief Justice of Canada, the Minister of Finance of the day, Hon. W. S. Fielding, all agreed' that if there was a change in form, there was no change in meaning or in substance. At column 6374 of 
Hansard, of 1904, Sir 'Charles Fitzpatrick said in response to a suggestion that the Governor in Council ought not to have the power to send the militia to any part of the Empire for the defence of Canada
We have had that power for a long time.
Later on in the debate he said:
Here is the position that is taken now, that we give to the Go/ernor in Council authority to employ the troops of Canada either within or without Canada for the defence of Canada. Then we make provision that Parliament should be summoned fifteen days after a declaration of war, and that the troops may be called out, so that Parliament shall decide then what use is to made of the troops whether within or without Canada, and what we are to do with them.
Further on he said:
The Governor in Council may send the militia of Canada out of Canada at any time when deemed necessary for the defence of Canada. If, in the opinion of the Governor in Council, it should be necessary, because of a war going on in India, to send our mihtia out there for the defence of Canada, they may, in the exercise of their discretion, do it, because they are the sole judges of what is necessary to he done in defence of Canada. But we do not think it advisable that that power should be absolutely and unrestrictedly in the hands of the Governor in Council. We think it advisable that the period during which they may exercise that power should be restricted and that Parliament should he ca1led together and be consulted at the earliest opportunity. Parliament must he summoned in fifteen cays and then the whole matter will be in the hands of the people's representatives.
I could quote many other passages along the same line, but I will only allude to one of them. The then member for Labelle (Mt. Bourassa) said in the same debate:
I admit that an emergency might arise when the Government should have the power to cal! out the militia immediately. ,
I do not dispute that; but suppose an occasion should arise on which Canada would be called upon to organize its militia and send a large pirtion of it outside of Canada, when in the judgment of a large number of the people and Parliament of Canada it would be to the disadvantage of the country to have so large a number of troops sent out, Parliament should . be the final judge of that question, and the Government should1 call Parliament to deal with-the matter.
So it will be apparent to hon. members of the Hodse that there was no question raised at all as to the power to send the militia outside of Canada for the defence of this country. It was conceded that the Government of the country must in the first instance be the absolute and uncontrolled judge of whether that necessity had arisen, and the only point raised was whether or not, in case that power were

exercised Parliament should be summoned to deal with the question, and within what time. The power to send our citizens enrolled in the militia outside Canada for the defence thereof, was fully conceded in the debate, and the construction placed upon the measure at that time was as I have already indicated.
I repeat that this measure' merely accepts and acts on a principle which has been embodied in our law for almost half a century, and which recognizes an equal obligation on all citizens for the defence of their country. There is an equal obligation but, under present conditions there cannot be an equal sacrifice. No sacrifice made hereafter can be as great as that of those who have already gone to the front, some of whom have fallen, and many of whom have already been in the trenches for two years.
It has been said of this Bill that it will induce disunion, discord, and strife, and that it will paralyze the nation's effort. I trust that this prophecy may prove unfounded. Why should strife be induced by the application of a principle which was adopted at the very inception of Confederation?
All citizens are entitled to equal protection of the laws, and upon them is imposed an equal obligation. There can be no national unity unless this principle is accepted. I cannot bring myself to believe that any class or community will expect to assert for itself the right or the power to defy the law, and to set up for itself different standards from those which are applied to the people as a whole.
It was my strong desire to bring about a union of all parties for the purpose of preventing any such disunion or strife as is apprehended. That effort was an absolutely sincere one, and I do not regret that it was made, although the delay which it occasioned may have given opportunity for increased agitation and for excitement arising from misunderstanding. I went so far as to agree that this Bill should not become effective until after a general election, in the hope that by this means all apprehension would be allayed, and that there might be a united effort to fulfil the great national purpose of winning this war. What may be necessary or expedient in that regard, I am yet willing to consider, for ever since this war began I have had one constant aim and it was this: to throw the full power and effort of Canada into the scale of right, liberty and justice for the winning of this war, and to maintain the unity of the Canadian people in that effort.
But I cannot shrink, and I will not shrink, from the determination to support and sustain the Canadian troops now at the front. It is said that the consequences of this measure are to be dreaded. Why they should be dreaded I cannot understand, for it introduces no new principle. I should rather Ibe concerned as to what may ensue if this Bill is not passed. The legislation of 1868 and 1904 was not mere stage play; it <was a serious measure with a serious purpose. The conditions which it calls for *have surely been fulfilled. God speed the day when the gallant men who are protecting and defending us will return to the land they love so well. Only those who have seen them at the front can realize how much they do love this dear land of Canada. If we do not pass this measure, if we do not provide reinforcements, if we do not keep *our plighted faith, with what countenance shall we meet them on their return? They have seen their friends and comrades discoloured and gasping from poison gas at Ypres. They have known what it means to have regiments decimated, to see comrades and brothers struck down. They have held on grimly in the trenches in the Ypres salient and elsewhere against overwhelming numbers and under the devastating *power of the enemy's artillery when we lacked guns and munitions. They have climbed the heights of the Vimy Bidge and driven the Germans far beyond it. They *have answered the call of service and duty, they have fought and died that Canada might live and that the horrors and desolation of war might never be known within our borders. They went foith splendid -in their youth and confidence. They will come back silent, grim, determined men, who not once or twice but fifty times have gone over the parapet to seek their rendezvous with death. If what are left of 400,000 such men come back to Canada with fierce resentment, and even rage in their hearts, conscious that they have been deserted and betrayed, how shall we meet *them when they ask the reason? I am not iso much concerned for the day when this Bill becomes law, as for the day when these men return if it is rejected. It is easy to sow the wind of clamour against the imposition of equal duty and obligation upon all Canadians for the preservation of their country; but those who make that sowing may reap such, a whirlwind as they do not dream of to-day.
I hope that this measure will be received by the House and by the country
[Stage Direction]
in the spirit in which it is offered. It is presented from a sense of duty and with no desire or intention of interfering with the legitimate rights of any of the citizens of (this country. It is inspired by the sincere belief that in truth we are fighting a battle which involves the destiny of Canada and of the whole world', by the strong conviction that the protection of our country, its citizens, their liberties and their heritage, depends upon the success of our efforts.
I trust that the debate will be characterized by a sense of the grave responsibilities which thus devolve upon this Parliament tand upon the people. I hope that it will be conducted with fairness and moderation, with no angry word or taunt, so that those who come after may know that the men of this day and generation representing the .Canadian people in their Parliament, were animated by ideals and inspired by motives far above the paltry and insignificant considerations of lesser days. I hope that this /measure will be so received that those who are holding the trenches beyond the seas, fighting for our security and our liberty, may realize that their trust in us is not in vain. This afternoon there are 125,000 Canadians pressing back the invaders in France and Belgium. Let us prove our-iselves worthy to call them comrades. Some imay have made the supreme sacrifice for Canada even as we speak. Let us summon in thought these brave comrades, firm of heart and strong of purpose, those who have fought, yes and those who shall fight no more, let us summon them in the spirit to our deliberations, let us speak and determine as if they were in onr midst.
Right hon. Sir WILFRID LAURIER: Mr. Speaker, as the rules of the1 House do not permit at this stage a full discussion of the principle which is involved in this Bill, I shall have to content myself with simply making one observation. My right hon. friend has expressed the hope that this debate shall be characterized by frankness and moderation. I can assure him that on this side of the House his wish in that respect will be fully gratified. Whatever we may say as to the measure now before the House we shall say as befits members of the House of Commons and as free British citizens, and if we have to differ, we shall differ more in sorrow than in anger. I appreciate what my right hon. friend has said that the duties that devolve upon him are of great magnitude. Perhaps he will allow me to say that the duties that devolve upon me are -as important in one

way as are his own; and perhaps he will allow me to tell him that the position which I hold, and which I may have to defend, may be perhaps involved in more difficulties than those which he has to meet. I say no further to-day. I have only one request to make. My right hon. friend refers to matters which he is to lay before the House. He states that before the second reading of the Bill, when discussion will really commence, he will place on the Table the statistics of which he has spoken, but which he did not give, of the number of available men between the ages of twenty and forty-five. I hope he will give that statement to the House in ample time, before we take up the second reading of the Bill.
Sir ROBERT BORDEN:: I shall endeavour to do it at the earliest possible moment.


Mr. E. M. MACDONALD (Pictou):: Would my right hon. friend (Sir Robert Borden) be good enough to say, if he can at this stage, whether it will he the policy of the Government to provide, by amendment ' of this Bill or otherwise, for registration of the people by statute similar to that passed in the United States?


Robert Laird Borden: The provision to which I have alluded is the only provision the Government has in contemplation at present.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: May I ask if there will be a statutory definition of the words "national interest" used in section 11 of the Bill, or whether the interpretation of the meaning will be left to the different local boards?


Robert Laird Borden: There is provision that regulations may be made for the purpose of securing uniformity in the application of the Act; but the point has only been taken into consideration in that way.,


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: And there will be no statutory definition?


Robert Laird Borden: It is not in contemplation at the moment. I shall be glad to hear the suggestions of my hon. friend (Mr. Macdonald) or of any other hon. member as to that. At present we have not in contemplation a statutory definition, but we have provided that regulations may be made for the purpose of securing uniformity in the application of the Act. There is a similar provision in the British Act.


Air. PUGSLBY:: In the statistics to be given, showing the number of men avail-

able between the ages of twenty and forty-five, is it intended to give the numbers in different classes, or only the total?


Robert Laird Borden: Some of the information we shall give to the House may relate to each of the different classes, but other information that we may be able to furnish possibly will not be so detailed but may embrace two, three or four classes. We will do the best we can. in every case.


Mr. MURPHY:: In connection with the information the hon. gentleman is to lay on the Table, showing how many men are available between twenty and forty-five, will the Prime Minister be good enough to include a statement of the number of these men who have actually enlisted?


Robert Laird Borden: We will endeavour to do so.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: By your
leave, Mr. Speaker, I desire to ask one more question. Through the courtesy of my right hon. friend (Sir Robert Borden) I received a copy of the Bill which, he has' just introduced. But, as between this copy and the Bill which has just been distributed, I find some discrepancies, For instance, in. the schedule; in the. Bill given me by my right hon. friend there are eight sections, but in the Bill which has been distributed there are only seven. I call the attention of my right hon. friend to this, so that we may have before us a correct copy of the Bill.


Robert Laird Borden: It may be that I have sent to my right hon, friend a previous print.


Wilfrid Laurier: But I am not quite sure which is the correct one.


Robert Laird Borden: In the schedule to the Bill there are seven sections,


Wilfrid Laurier: So, the last
one I have is the correct one. All right.
Motion agreed to and Bill read the first time.



SIR JULIAN BYNG.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Sir SAM HUGHES:: I observe by the
press of the country that a despatch has been issued stating that Sir Julian Byng has ceased to be in command of the Canadian troops at the front. I desire to ask *if this is true, and,, if so, whether- one of pur Canadian officers is going to succeed [DOT] him.


Sir EDWARD KEMP (Minister of Militia) :: I also read the despatch in the
morning paper. I expect to have an explanation to-morrow or next day. I have made inquiries, but have not received information up to the present.



PURCHASE OF CHEESE BY THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. E. W. NESBITT (North Oxford):: I desire to ask a question of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Burrell). Has the hon. gentleman had, any protest from the central and western parts of Ontario with reference to the order of the commission for the purchase of cheese, that this cheese is to be weighed and inspected at Montreal, and not in the warehouse in the West? I have received several protests, which, the writers say, they have sent also to the minister. I should like to know if he has received these protests and what he purposes doing about the matter.


Hon. MARTIN BURRELL (Minister of Agriculture):: This matter has been drawn to my attention. I would remind my hon. friend (Mr. Nesbitt) that the inspection which formerly took place at western points was really an inspection between the buyer and the seller, but in the present case the British representatives on the commission are buying the cheese f.o.b. Montreal. I have had one or two representations on the lines referred to, and I have turned them over to the commissioners who have offices in Montreal, and who., I am certain, will give to these matters the fullest, fairest consideration, with a view to devising the best regulations and methods for the interests both of the purchaser and of the shipper.


Charles Murphy: The Minister of Agriculture last week was kind enough to give information in answer to an inquiry (based on information furnished :by some constituents of mine whom the hon. gentlemen himself represented as among the most important cheese manufacturers in Canada. I am in, receipt of a further letter asking for information. It is pointed out that the price fixed for the cheese, as my hon. friend, I think, stated to the House, last week, is 241 cents f.o.b. *ship, Montreal. My correspondents allege that there must be taken from that price 11 cents for manufacturing, .and ,a further small fractional sum paid to the wholesaler, and that being deducted would make the

net price to the Canadian manufacturer something less than 20 cents. My correspondents point out that the price in Liverpool and in England is 32 cents, and they want to know why the discrepancy between the price in Canada and the price in England.


Martin Burrell: I think my hon. friend must be mistaken as to his figures.


Charles Murphy: That is what is *stated in this letter.


Martin Burrell: The last quotation of the Brockville Cheese Board, I think, was 20|. I think it will be found that, speaking generally, considering freight, the difference would be about three-quarters of a cent between that and the price f.o.b., Montreal. However, I cannot give my hon. friend any .answer on that particular subject, as it is entirely a matter for the British authorities to deal with. They decided what kind of a price they would -authorize their representatives to pay. Mr. McGowan has taken the matter up with the most absolute fairness. There is probably no market for any cheese coming from the outside, because t'he British authorities have commandeered the whole thing. Our only hope 

at least representations have been made to that effect-is that the price that is given will not be lessened, and, if possible, it will be bettered. However, it is not a question that we have any control over at all.


Mr. MORPHY (North Perth):: Might 1 ask my hon. friend the Minister of Agriculture whether or not he consulted the Western Ontario Cheese Association or kindred associations 'before he put that legislation in force?


Martin Burrell: There is no legislation at all.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: There is an Order in Council.


Martin Burrell: There is not even an Order in Council.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Well, you have taken action.


Martin Burrell: The Government have had the matter under consideration and have appointed, in addition to the British commissioner, Mr. Ruddick, of the Department of Agriculture, and Mr. Alexander, of Montreal, an old member of the cheese trade there, with the idea of seeing that the regu-

lations are carried out, these gentlemen acting in an advisory capacity.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Are the same regulations in force on the other side of the line as to price as those which are in force on this side and is it absolutely necessary that the cheese men should: abide by all the conditions laid down by this Cheese Commission without any remedy? Have they got to -comply with them whether they want to or not and are the prices the same on the other side of the line?


Martin Burrell: 
Edward Walter Nesbitt: When I asked that-
Mr. SiPEAKER: I hope the hon. member will conclude his question because it may lead to a debate on this subject, which would not be in order.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: I quite appreciate that,
but I wanted to find out if they would have to sell.



RESOLUTION OF THE MONTREAL TRADES AND LABOUR COUNCIL.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day.
Robert Laird Borden: The hon. member for Rouville (Mr. Lemieux) -asked me some time ago in regard to a resolution from the Trades and Labour Council of Montreal adopted on or about May 17. My hon. friend the Minister of Labour (Mr. Crothers), on the 6th June stated that it had not been received by the Government. It was received by myself and I acknowledged it on the 22nd May, 1917. My hon. friend the Minister of Labour was not aware, that the resolution had been received, and I overlooked the fact.



RUMOURED RESIGNATION FROM THE CABINET OF THE HON. MR.


[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day.
Wilfrid Laurier: Might I ask
my right hon. friend the Prime Minister if the rumour which reached us this morning is correct, that the hon. the Secretary of State (Mr. Patenaude) had tendered his resignation and whether it has been accepted?


Robert Laird Borden: I will make a
statement to-morrow.



TELEGRAM FROM THE YUKON RE PRICE ADVANCES.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hon. FRANK OLIVER (Edmonton):: I desire to offer a further contribution to the Parliamentary literature on the subject of the high cost of living. I have a wire which is as follows:
Dawson, Yukon, June 9, 1917. Frank Oliver, M.P.,
Ottawa.
May twenty-fourth Dawson flour advanced from seven to eleven dollars at one jump; bread almost doubled in price. This advance is on old stock bought at last summer's prices; no new stock received. Women's protective league wrote urgent letter to administrator Williams requesting immediate action. He states there will be no written answer to our letter. We then held open meeting to discuss high prices. Yukon councillors publicly invited but not one councillor attended. Miners came in from Creeks to meeting which was largely representative of working people. Result of meeting night letter two hundred fifty words to Premier Borden sent June first; no answer yet. Administrator Williams endeavours to justify extortionate increase. Outside of official and commercial circles general dissatisfaction and indignation freely expressed. Situation becoming serious. Please see Borden ; telegraph and act. We trust you implicitly. Answer prepaid.
(Sgd) Geraldine McD. L. Sharpe, Secretary Women's Protective League.
Marie Fotheringham,
Secretary Yukon Progressive League.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I had assumed that it was the purpose of the hon. gentleman to ask a question of the Government. In not having done so, he has taken a liberty with the rules.


Frank Oliver: Of course, the question is contained in the telegram and I hope my right hon. friend the Prime Minister will give the answer desired by these two women's leagues in the Yukon.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: We are passing through unusual times and I have endeavoured not
to be too rigid in the enforcement of the rules of order, but I must appeal to hon. gentlemen on both sides of the House to regard this indulgence in a 'much more careful manner than has recently been the case.


Robert Laird Borden: I am afraid my hon. friend (Mr. Oliver) has not fulfilled his trust because I cannot recall that he has seen me on the subject. However, the telegram there alluded to was transferred by me to my hon. friend the Minister of Labour (Mr. Crothers) who has just informed me that he sent a reply to Mrs. Sharpe. Since then I have not had the matter brought before me until my hon. friend mentioned it to-day. My hon. friend the Minister of Labour will make a statement on the action which he took.


Hon. T. W. CROTHERS (Minister of Labour):: The telegram referred to by the hon. member for Edmonton (Mr. Oliver) was received at the Prime Minister's office and referred to me. After consultation with the hon. member for the Yukon (Mr. Thompson) I replied to Mrs. Sharpe and I also wrote-it was not a matter that we could telegraph very well-to the company referred to concerning the prices. I sent a copy of this telegram and asked them what they had to say about it. There has not been time yet to receive a reply from him. As soon as I have an answer I shall show it to my hon. friend and take such action as is considered proper.



EMBARGO ON PENNSYLVANIA COAL.

Hon. CHARLES MAROIL (B.onaventure):: Has the Minister of Labour anything to. state regarding the message I gave him about an embargo on Pennyslvania coal coming into Canada? Is he in a position to give me any information in the matter?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I think it was on Thursday evening that the hon. gentleman from Bonaventure showed me a letter stating that Pennsylvania had placed an embargo on coal. I took it up with the Board of Railway Commissioners, and this morning I received a letter in rbply to say that the Pennsylvania Railway, through Mr. Rogers, general superintendent at Buffalo, had advised that embargo number 1437 had been cancelled on May 31. I take it that that number Tefers to the embargo the gentleman who communicated with my hon friend complained of. So that it appears the embargo was removed on the 31st May.



LABOUR STRIKES IN WESTERN COAL MINES.

Frank Oliver: I
notice by the papers that the coal strike, which formerly was confined to Southern Alberta, has extended to Northern Alberta, as a result the bituminous mines on the railway lines west of Edmontpn are tied up. Has the minister any information on that point, and has he taken any action which may be disclosed to the House?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: In reply to my hon.
friend from Edmonton, I may say that Mr. Green, a member of this House, reached Calgary, I think a week ago this morning. He has been in communication with the operators and the representatives of the mines since that time. I have not received any particulars as to the progress he has made, I sent him a message on Saturday asking for particulars, and requesting him to state the present situation, and the prospect. I expected a wire from him, but it has not arrived. If T receive any information I shall communicate it to my hon. friend.


Frank Oliver: There is a very wide difference in locality between the two areas. Hitherto they have not been under the same co-operation in union matters. I should be very glad if the minister would get information relating specially to the mines in Northern Alberta, in which I am more particularly interested, as they took no part in the strike until the last few days, showing they are not under the same jurisdiction as the other mines, and are animated by different motives.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: If my hon. friend would give me the names of the mines to which he refers, I could perhaps answer his inquiry.


Frank Oliver: Jasper Park Collieries at Pocahontas, and Brule Lake Mines, on Brule Lake on the Canadian Northern, the Pacific Pass Mine and the Mountain Park Mine. These four would be the principal ones.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I have received no information concerning a strike at any of these points. When did the hon. member learn it?


Frank Oliver: I saw it in the press on Saturday.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I have no information, but I will inquire.



PRIVATE BILLS.


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 70, for the relief of Colin Dar-rach Poole.-Mr. A. H. Clarke.
Bill No. 71, for the relief of Thomas Edwin Jory.-Mr. Nickle.
Bill No. 72, for the relief of Florence Evaline Synder Lockwood.-Mr. Kay.

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

Mr. A. W. CHISHOLM:: 1.	What are the names of the Provincial Directors of National Service for each province, and what compensation, if any, is paid them?
2.	How many are employed as assistants in each province?
3.	Are the assistants paid for their services?
4.	If so, on what scale?


Robert Laird Borden: Monthly
Province and Director.	Salary.
Ontario, M.D. No. 1, K. W.	McKay.... $250
Ontario, M.D. No. 2, Lt.-Col. H. Brock... None Ontario, M.D. No. 3, Capt. W. N. Bowen $250 Quebec, M.D. No. 4, J. H. Sherrard, Col.
A. Mignault	None
Quebec, M.D. No. 5, Lt.-Col. C. A. Chauveau $250 Nova Scotia, M.D. No. 6, G. S. Campbell.. None P. E. Island, M.D. No. 6, J. A. Macdonald $250 N. Brunswick, M.D. No. 6, L. P. D. Tilley. None Manitoba, M.D. No. 10, E. R. Chapman.. $250 Br. Columbia, M.D. No. 11, R. F. Green.. None Saskatchewan, M.D. No. 12, A. L. Haining $250 Alberta, M.D. No. 13, Hon. A. C. Rutherford	 $250
Director of Munitions Labour.
Mark Irish, Toronto	None
2,	3 and 4. Those assisting Directors of National Service in the various Military Districts are voluntary workers and do not receive salary.


THE SOUTH AFRICAN WAR.
Mr. BOULAY:: 1.	How many Canadian officers and soldiers took part in the military expedition in the Transvaal ?
2.	What amount has been paid by .the Government of Canada generally, on account of said expedition ?


Sir EDWARD KEMP:: 1.	384 officers, 7,988 rank and file; 8,372 all ranks.
2.	$2,830,965.07.


THE ECONOMIC COMMISSION.
Mr. CHISHOLM:: 1.	Who are the members of the Economic Commission ?

2.	When was the Commission created?
3.	Have they reported?
4.	If so, where is the report available?
5.	What amounts, if any, have been paid to each of these Commissioners to date?


Sir ROBERT BORDEN:: 1.	The Hon. Sir James Lougheed, Calgary, chairman; the Hon, W. B. Ross, Middleton, N.S.; J. G. Rutherford, Esq., Calgary; William Farrell, Esq., Vancouver, B.C.; E. N. Hopkins, Esq., Toronto; S. J. B. Rolland, Esq., Montreal, Que.; J. C. Watters, Esq., Ottawa, and William Smith, Esq., M.P., Columbus, Ontario.
2.	By Order in Council (P. C. 1517) of 28th* June, 1915.
3.	No report has been made, but the duties of the commission being largely suggestive and advisory, their views on certain subjects have been discussed informally with the Government for the purpose of advising or assisting the Government touching many subjects upon which it has been necessary to take action either by way of legislation or otherwise.
4.	Answered by No. 3.
5.	The following amounts, made up of per diem allowance provided for by Order in Council (P. C. 2722) of December 18, 1915, living and travelling expenses while on the business of the commission, have been paid to the commissioners, namely, Hon. Sir James Lougheed, chairman, $620; William Farrell, $761.45; E. N. Hopkins, $474.10; S. J. B. Rolland, $148.50; Hon. W. B. Ross, $438.90; J. G. Rutherford, $424.40; William Smith, $91.05; J. C. Watters, $80.


LEWIS MACHINE GUNS.
Mr. PARDEE:: 1.	Did General Lessard make a report on the state of Militia matters effecting Canadian troops in England?
2.	If so, is there any information contained in said report regarding Lewis Machine Guns subscribed for by the people of the Dominion of Canada?


Sir EDWARD KEMP:: 1.	No such report is to be found on the files of the department.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


MR. R. G. M. PARKER, HOMESTEAD INSPECTOR.
Mr. MACNUTT:: 1.	Is the Government aware as to whether or not Mr. R. G. M. Parker, Homestead Inspector for the Yorkton District, accepted the Conservative nomination for the Pelly District for the Saskatchewan Legislative Assembly, on April 3rd last, and as to whether or not he is still drawing salary as Homestead Inspector?
2,	If not, at what date did he cease drawing said salary?


Mr. ROCHE:: 1.	No; he is not receiving salary as homestead inspector.
2.	31st of May, 1917.


GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS-COAL CARS.
Mr. MARTIN:: 1.	What was the date of the last order for coal cars given by the Railway Department to Canadian Car Companies?
2.	How many cars were ordered, and from whom?
3.	When were said cars delivered?


Mr. COCHRANE:: 1.	October, 1914.
2.	250-From Eastern Car Company.
3.	June, 1915.


CANADIAN EXPEDITIONARY FORCES- CASUALTIES.
Mr. SMITH:: 1.	What has been the total number of casualties in the Canadain Expeditionary Forces since June, 1916, to date?
2.	What has been the total number of recruits enlisted in the Canadian Expeditionary Forces from June, 1916, to date?
3.	What was the total number of casualties for the months of February, March and April last? (
4.	What was the total number of recruits for the same months?
5.	What is the recruiting record for the Canadian Expeditionary Forces by months since the outbreak of the war?
6.	What has been the total number of recruits enlisted for the Canadian Defence Force to date?


Sir EDWARD KEMP:: 1. Statement of casualties of Canadian Expeditionary Force reported to Record Office from June 30, 1916, to June 5, 1917:-
		Other	
Officers.	Ranks.	Totals.Killed in action .	... 610	11,454	-'12,064Died of wounds .	. . . 176	3,634	3,810Died of sickness.	. . . 38	873	911Presumed dead. . .	. . . 24	1,304	1,328Missing 	. . . 50	553	603Wounded 	... 2,018	43,805	45,823Prisoners of war.	. . . 41	969	1,0102,957	62,592	65,549* The above	totals of	missin	g are
amended, as the number of officers and other ranks included under this category are subsequently reported killed in action, presumed dead, prisoners of war, etc.
2.	Number of recruits enlisted in the 0. E. E. from June 30, 1916, to May 31, 1917, 74,510.
3.	Statement of casualties of Canadian Expeditionary Force reported to Record Office from February 1 1917, to April 30, 1917:-

Other
Officers.	ranks.	Totals.Killed in action	.. 180'	2,891	3,071Died of wounds	. . 50	792	842Died of sickness	. . 19	483	502Presumed dead	. . 1	425	426Wounded . . . .	. . 614	11,629	12,243Missing	. . 54	436	490Prisoners of war	. . 4	57	61922	16,723	17,645
* The a'hove totals of missing are amended as the number of officers and other ranks included under this category are subsequently reported killed in action, presumed dead, prisoners of war, etc.
4.	Number of recruits enlisted for the months of February, March and April, 1917, 19,584.
5.	Number of recruits obtained for the Canadian Expeditionary Force during 1916 and 1917, by months:-
Recruits Recruits 1916.	1917.
January . . . .	. . 29,212	7,721February	. 26,658	7,644March	. 32,819	6,670April	. 23,289	5,270 \May	. 15,090	6,520June [DOT]	. 10,796	July	. -8,675	August	. 7,267	September	. 6,357	October	. 6,035	November ... .	. 6,548	December	. 5,803	Total	. 178,549	33,825No authentic	monthly records	available
prior to January, 1916. 6. Five hundred.


LOCKPORT COLD STORAGE.
Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:: What amount has been paid by the Government of Canada to the Loclcport Cold Storage Company, Limited, formerly the Maritime Cold Storage Limited, as a subsidy?


Martin Burrell: 


UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PAPERS.
Mr. SINCLAIR:: For a copy of all corrre-spondence, telegrams, requests, petitions and other papers in the possession of the Department of Trade and Commerce relating to providing a supply of salt for the fisheries of the Maritime Provinces.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Rainville in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
Railways and Canals-chargeable to capital -Canadian Government Railways, contruction and betterments, $6,500,000.
William Pugsley: It is usual for the minister, in bringing down his Estimates, to make a general statement in regard to the Government railways.


Hon. FRANK COCHRANE (Minister of Railways and Canals):: We are now
operating as the Canadian Government Railways System 4,063 miles of railroad. Briefly, the results of operating these railways show that we will have a surplus of $1,074,334 on the Intercolonial, and that we will sustain a deficit of $1,890,371 on the Transcontinental Railway for the recent fiscal year. [DOT]
Mileage.
Intercolonial, 1,562; Transcontinental, 2,009; Prince Edward Island, 275; International, 112; St. John Valley, 105. Total, 4,063.
Earnings.
The earnings on the Intercolonial during the four winter months were abnormally low, on account of the fact that our qpera-tions were directly mainly to the handling of war supplies to Halifax and St. John, and as these ports take the same freight rate as Portland, the Intercolonial's proportion of the through freight Tate for its 836 mile haul to Halifax, or 740 mile haul to St. John, as against the Grand Trunk's 297 mile haul to Portland, or the Canadian Pacific's 481 mile haul to St. John, gives an earning as low as $2.20 per ton on hay, oats, flour, etc., which is less than 50 per cent of the actual cost of its transportation. We have also had to move for war purposes large quantities of other low class war freight, and, in order to do this, had to embargo many ordinary lines of shipment which paid higher rates. In this way we were called upon to sustain losses upon operations during these months which, under ordinary conditions, would have shown surpluses.
Intercolonial Railway.
The figures that I am using are subject to slight modification, but on the Intercolonial during the recent fiscal year we earned $16,805,723.64 and spent $15,731,389.

giving us a surplus of $1,137,713, which will be absorbed by our equipment renewal account. Our surplus last year was $1,517,295.
Operating expenses during the year have increased greatly, due to the enhanced cost of coal, increase in wages, increase in cost of material and supplies. On the Intercolonial, operating expenses were unduly heavy during the recent winter, because of extreme weather conditions and the congestion of traffic in Montreal terminals.
Transcontinental Railway.
On the Transcontinental railway we earned $5,916,550, as compared with $3,758,387 last year, and the operating expenses were $7,883,177, as compared with $4,410,528 for the eleven months of the previous year.
The large deficit on the Transcontinental railway is due to the comparatively small amount of traffic offering for that railway and to the fact that we have .been obliged to establish trains not at present warranted by the business offering. In, addition, we are maintaining the road to the standard of other transcontinental railways, so that we may offer the same safety and comfort in travel as is offered by other transcontinental lines.
Government Railways System.
The operating expenses of the entire Government Railways system for the twelve months were $24,645,433 as against $17,797,061 for the previous year. The earnings for the year weTe $23,465,565 as compared with $18,373,143 for the .previous year. The deficit, therefore, on the .combined operations for the y^ar amounts to $1,179,867.
Coal Troubles.
I have already mentioned the reasons given by the management for the great increase in the coat of operation. The item of coal alone was most serious. We contracted for an ample supply, but during the winter the coal miners in eastern Canada claimed to be unable to make delivery, (although we offered them more money. Rather than commandeer the output consigned over our lines for commercial ana industrial purposes, we had to import large quantities at an increased cost of $486,240.
Extreme Weather Conditions.
Weather conditions last winter in Quebec and Northern New Brunswick were the .most severe in many years. Heavy storms and zero weather prevailed almost continuously from January 20 to February 19, and there were also some bad storms in March. Snow-fighting gangs and snowplough trains had to be continuously employed during this period. Our .snow-fighting expense during January and February between Montreal and Moncton was $169,288, as compared with $64,757 last year.
The cost of operation was adversely affected also by heavy weather and consequent delays, and on account of Grand Trunk congestion at Montreal. This led to a most unfortunate situation as, under the 99-year joint terminal agreement entered into by the late Government in 1898, we are dependent upon the Grand1 Trunk for terminal accommodation at that point. This inability of the Grand Trunk to accept business from us resulted in the setting out at one period of about 3,000 west-bound cars, blocking numerous passing tracks, resulting in delay to more than 700 cars of steel urgently required for munitions, and necessitating marshalling westbound trains on out line, work ordinarily done by switch engines in Montreal yards. Overtime in freight service increased $38,000. These conditions at Montreal obliged us to return 49 locomotives and vans, without loads, from Halifax to Montreal in order to maintain our overseas movement. It will he seen, therefore, that conditions were quite abnormal.
Curtailed Passenger Service.
In common with the other great railway systems in Canada, and after conference with the Chairman of the Dominion Railway Board, we decided, in view of the coal situation and urgent overseas movement, to curtail the Intercolonial passenger service, and several local trains and one of our through express trains were taken off during the winter. This also tended to reduce our revenue, and the curtailed service led to considerable inconvenience; but, with the advent of spring and the opening of navigation and the general easing up of conditions, the passenger service heretofore enjoyed on the Intercolonial railway has been resumed.
Nearly Six Million Passengers Carried Without Fatal Accident.
The total number of passengers carried over the system during the calendar year, January to December, 1916, inclusive, was 5,673,796. Included in this number were militia and naval passengers totalling 277,155, carried in 443 special trains. Although we carried nearly six million passengers



during the year, there were few accidents and no passengers were killed although* 22 suffered injuries.


William Pugsley: The minister speaks of there being no loss of life. My information is that in one week last winter there were twenty train wrecks, twenty locomotives being thrown off the track. Does the minister make any reference to that?


Francis Cochrane: I do not.


William Pugsley: The minister makes reference only to loss of life, not to train wrecks.


Francis Cochrane: The hon. member
would like to gain a political point; that is his idea.
Troop Trains Well Handled.
As regards the handling of troop trains; my advice is that, while the schedules of these trains were slow, the movements were uniformly good, and that at no time was it necessary to delay a ship at Halifax waiting for troops. lIn the majority of cases the delay has been the other way, and it has been necessary to hold troops in trains at Halifax for considerable periods before they could embark. The largest single movement was 25 trains.
Halifax Terminals Speeded Up.
To assist in handling the overseas shipment of stores and timber, special efforts were made to complete three berths and two immense temporary sheds at the new Ocean Terminals, Halifax. This was a big undertaking but was satisfactorily completed by November 15. When the war broke out our yards could accommodate 1,844 ears in and around Halifax; we are now able to handle 3,748 cars, which is a striking indication of our overseas development at that point.
The grading from Point Pleasant to Fair-view has been practically completed. The substructure of the subway at Fairview has been completed and a temporary steel span erected. Two concrete highway arches, one at Mumfo.rd road and one at Quinpool road, have been completed, and the foundations finished for Chebucto and iByers roads and Prince Arthur street.
Work Well in Hand.
The filling behind the bulkhead passenger landing quay wall and north of basin No. 1 is about 60 per cent completed, but very little more can be done until the quay walls are finished. The foundation of the quay walls for the bulkhead passenger landing

quay, north quay wall, basin No. 1 and quay walls pier No. 1 are practically finished. The dredging for the first unit is about 90 per cent completed; the breakwater wholly so. The new outlet for the city sewer is finished to the head of basin No. 1.
Line Improvements.
Eighty miles of main line track on the Intercolonial have been relaid with 85-pound rails, as well as 10 miles of the New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island railway branch line, which will make the connection between the Intercolonial and the new Prince Edward Island car ferry.
One million one hundred thousand tie renewals have been made on Government railways. One hundred and seventy miles of track have been re-ballasted. Eight passing sidings were extended, two new ones built, as well as fourteen business sidings and fifty-two , private sidings. The following terminal yards were enlarged to the total extent of 3,061 cars capacity: Chau-diere Junction, 580 cars, St. Rosalie Junction, 230 cars, Moncton, 369 cars, Truro,. 282 cars; Rockingham, 1,600 cars.
This work alone cost us about a quarter of a million dollars, but without it we could not have begun to handle this last winter's business, when the steel shipments from the Maritime Provinces, westbound, were very heavy, and quite as important, from the standpoint of munitions, as the eastbound traffic. These greatly enlarged terminals and extended passing sidings really saved the day from the traffic standpoint.
A million bushel concrete grain elevator is being erected by contract at Transcona, and a 500,000 bushel grain elevator with conveyers at St. John, both of which are to be completed for the grain business this year.
The steamship Northumberland was 'purchased from the Charlottetown Steamship-Navigation Company for use between Prince Edward Island and the mainland.
The work of beautifying the station grounds was continued during the year, and some 33 new lawns and flower beds constructed.
In addition to repairs to a large number of structures, 22 steel railway bridges were erected and 6 overhead bridges replaced with steel spans.
Increased Engine Capacity.
Sixty modern freight engines, of the Mikado and Santa Fe type, were contracted for, the former having a haulage capacity of 265 per cent and the latter of 320 per

cent, as compared with 220 per cent, which was the capacity of the largest locomotives previously in the service.
Slow Delivery of Freight Cars.
We ordered 1,000 fifty-ton box cars in the spring of 1916 from two large car manufacturers in eastern Canada, delivery to be completed by October 1, 1916, and January 1, 1917, so. as to assist in the winter overseas freight movement; but the contractors failed to make delivery, causing much disappointment and delay, and adversely affecting overseas business. Delivery of one order of 500 was only completed on April 15 last, and in the other case only 167 of the 500 had been delivered up to April 17.
Busy Shops.
The immense demand for transportation facilities created unusual demands for locomotives and caTS. By employing an increased number of car repair men our "bad orderM freight fears were reduced from 1,410 to 400 during the year. We have repaired over 12,000 freight cars during the year, converted 225 to pulp cars and vans, and built 50 new flats, applied metal draft arms to 500 and safety appliances to 700. We made heavy repairs to 218 passenger cars during the year and completed the building of 4 baggage cars and 2 postal cars with steel underframes, all completely built in the Moncton shops, and also remodelled and overhauled 79 sleeping, dining and parlour cars. We looked closely after repairs to foreign equipment, and have a balance in our favour for the year of about $90,000.
Providing Military and Hospital Trains.
We have been very busy in the Passenger Car Department during the winter endeavouring to provide passenger car equipment for military purposes, which embraced transportation on both the Intercolonial and the Transcontinental. We converted 10 sleeping cars into military hospital cars. Eight of these were repaired and painted and converted into hospital cars in 14 days. The foremen and mechanics worked in relays at high pressure, day and night, Sundays and holidays, on these cars with gratifying results, and all hands were commended and thanked for the performance of such difficult and unusual work in such a short time. In addition to these 10 hospital cars we have assigned for hospital movement seven standard sleepers, and equipped 13 tourist and six old style
141 i
sleepers which we use as tourist cars, making a total of 26 cars in hospital service. The 10 Red Cross cars aggregate 105 cots, 10 sections, 99 uppers and 5 drawing rooms. The tourist cars have a carrying capacity of 971, making total carrying capacity available for 1,200 persons.
Prince Edward Island Car Ferry and Terminals.
The car ferry steamer has been in service during the winter, between Pictou and Prince Edward Island ports, as an icebreaking steamer, and has demonstrated her capacity for dealing with any ice conditions which may arise. At Cape Tormen-tine the landing pier and the bridges for transferring cars between pier and steamer deck are completed, some adjustment of machinery in the power nouse, and the installation of electric light plant, being all that is required to render this terminal available for service. Additional stone is yet to be added to the breakwater, and the capping stone placed, but the structure in its present condition affords good protection to the steamer berth and turning basin.
At Carleton Point progress during the season suffered through shortage of labour and the occurrence of violent storms.
The railway connection between the ferry landing and the existing lines of the Prince Edward Island railway has been completed, together with the terminal yard and buildings at Carleton Point. Some additional facilities for handling freight at this point will be added as business develops. About a week's dredging is required to clean up some high spots to give a workable turning basin for the steamer, although considerable dredging will be required to enlarge the basin to specifications. This, however, can be done during the summer. Taken altogether, the landing at Carleton Point is now usable except for the lack of a spring fender. The work on this is well forward and the placing of the fender should be completed about the middle of June, and the work in all respects completed this season.
The total estimated cost of the work is $2,910,000, of which we have expended to date $2,600,000.
Hudson Bay Railway and Terminals.
During the past year the rail has been brought up to Mile 332, which is the crossing of the Nelson river at Kettle rapids. The work was behind schedule, partly owing to a labour shortage and partly to the destruction by fire of the contractor's tracklaying outfit thus preventing the construe-

tion of the substructure of this bridge before the rise of water which here accompanies ice formation. The substructure of this bridge will be completed on the south side of the Nelson river on May 21, and preparations for start on. north side will follow immediately. The steel work of the superstructure is en route to this site. Of the ninety-two miles of grade between this bridge and Port Nelson, work remains to be done at isolated .points to an aggregate amount of eleven miles of light grading. Some train filling remains to he done on the portion, of the line now built, and much of it has only received a first lift of ballast. It is contemplated that, track will be laid into Port Nelson this year and the ballasting of the line brought into fair shape to within a few miles of that terminus.
At Port Nelson a somewhat restricted programme has been followed owing to the effect of war conditions upon labour, materials and ocean tonnage. The bridge structure connecting the deepwater wharves with the mainland was completed, and 1,600 lineal feet of the cribwork of the island placed, built up and filled. The hydraulic dredge worked throughout the season in the channel. The clam shell dredges were employed in dredging stone and gravel from the river bottom for crib filling. During the present season it is hoped that a considerable portion of the island, including the site for the elevator, will be enclosed, and several section^ of the deep water dock face cribs placed in position.
The total estimated cost of this work is $26,000,000. We have expended to date $18,175,000, of which $12,565,000 has been in connection with the railway and $5,610,000 in connection with the terminal work at Port Nelson.
Welland Ship Canal.
The estimated cost of this work is fifty million dollars. We have expended to date about thirteen million dollars. As we could not get a return upon our investment for some years, we did not consider the continuance of construction justifiable under our immediate and pressing financial burdens, and orders have been issued suspending operations
Of the nine main sections into which the work have been divided by the engineers, four are now under contract, the estimated value of each of these and the amount expended thereon being:
Section No. 1, estimated value, $3,483,000; expended to date, $2,238,000. Section No. 2, estimated value, $5,377,000; expended to

date, $3,111,000. Section No. 3, estimated value, $9,540,000; expended to date, $3,234,000. Section No. 5, estimated value, $1,946,000; expended to date, $1,251,000.
The balance of the expenditures made on account of this work have been for purchase of land, cement and other materials furnished by the department, bridge superstructures procured under separate contracts, operation of construction railway, and miscellaneous. The work is in such condition that no damage is anticipated to occur during the period of suspended operations, and when conditions permit the resumption of the work none of the expenditure which has been made will have been lost.
Trent Canal.
Work upon the Ontario-Rice Lake Division is now drawing to a close. Sections Nos. 1, 5 and 7 are fully completed, and the remaining sections advanced to such a degree that we were able to take our lock gate lifter through the division and hang all the lock gates. The work remaining to be done is for the most part cleaning up the dredging, and this will be completed this season. The Grand Trunk Railway Company have assured us that they will proceed this season with the work involved in raising their low level bridge at Campbellford, so that navigation between lake Ontario and lake Couchiching may be confidently expected on the opening of the season of 1918.
On the Severn division work has proceeded upon the upper two sections which were under contract at the outbreak of the war. Section No. 1, to connect the upper river with Georgian bay, has not yet been placed under contract. The estimated values of the several main contracts and the amount expended to date upon each is as follows:-
Ontario-Rice Lake Division.
Section No. 1, estimated value, $1,105,569; completed. Section No. 2, estimated value, $750,000; expended to date, $721,000. Section No. 3, estimated value, $295,300; expended to date, $229,510. Section No. 4, estimated value, $1,265,000; expended to date, $1,226,000. Section No. 5, estimated value, $634,972; completed. Section No. 6, estimated value, $542,500; expended to date, $510,667. Section No. 7, estimated value, $460,029; completed.
Severn Division.
Port Severn section, estimated value, $160,000; expended to date, $152,900. Section

No. 2, estimated value, $712,000; expended to date, $247,300. Section No. 3, estimated value, $900,000; expended to date, $465,500.


William Pugsley: Can the hon. minister (Mr. Cochrane) give us information as to the number of bushels of wheat shipped over the Canadian Government railways during the past year, more particularly over the Transcontinental railway from Winnipeg?


Francis Cochrane: I have not that information, but I will get it.


William Pugsley: Last session, the Minister of Customs (Mr. Reid) who was acting Minister of Railways in the absence of . my hon. friend (Mr. Cochrane) gave me the assurance, in answer to a question, that by June or July of that year a regular fast jpassenger service would be established between the cities of St. John and Halifax and Winnipeg. Yet, all we have to-day from New Brunswick is -a service whieh almost meets the description given by a man in the Southern States of the railway facilities in his own section,-the train went down the line one week and next week tried to get back, making a tri-weekly service. I would ask the Minister of Railways why the promise made to us has not been carried out.


Mr. REID:: As the hon. member mentioned my name, perhaps I may be allowed a word. If I remember well, the question was asked by the hon. member when there would be a service through between the eastern provinces and Winnipeg on the Transcontinental, and I said that we expected that it would be established in June. That service would be from St. John and Halifax to Winnipeg, via Quebec and the Transcontinental. I think it was carried out about that time.


William Pugsley: Not at all; the service to-day is what it was before the question was asked and the assurance was given. If there is any change at all, the service is worse than it was then.


Mr. CARVELL:: The minister does not imagine that there is any service through from Moncton, say, to Levis? There is a sort of a freight train, or mixed, that leaves Moncton and goes as far as Edmundston, then tries to get back the next day-sometimes succeeds, but mostly doesn't. Then there is another sort of train that leaves Edmundston for Levis, I presume, the following day. But surely the minister does not pretend that we have anything like a through service.


John Dowsley Reid: As I recollect it, the question put to me was when passengers would be able to travel through from the lower provinces h\Winnipeg, on the Government system. You can come through from Halifax to Levis on the Intercolonial. I never expected that there would be a through service on the Transcontinental alone. But passengers can get through over the Government railway system.


William Pugsley: The hon. minister could not have meant that; he has forgotten the position. We had the mixed service twice a week-


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Three times.


William Pugsley: We had the tri-weekly, or semi-weekly service from Moncton to Levis at that time. I called his attention to that, and said that the object of the Transcontinental was to afford a comfortable through service for passengers between Halifax and St. John and Winnipeg, and the minister gave me assurance that a fast Pullman service would be established. He spoke of a Pullman service. But we have no different service from what we 'had when he gave the promise. You can leave Moncton and go to Edmundston, stay there over night, then, next morning, you can go on some distance further and stay over night again, making progress at the rate of about fourteen miles an hour-just about the same service that we had before. But what the minister promised was that in June or July there would be the same sort of service as on the Canadian Pacific between St, John and the West. The minister is absolutely mistaken if he says that he simply meant that we should be able to get through in some way from Moncton.


John Dowsley Reid: I suppose that Hansard will show what I said, but as I recollect the discussion the point was as to when passengers could leave Halifax or St. John and go over the Government railway system to Winnipeg, because at that time they were going over the Government railway system to Montreal, then over the Grand Trunk and then connect with the Transcontinental again .at Cochrane. I stated that about the middle of June .a passenger service would be established between Quebec and Cochrane, so that passengers could go through from Halifax and St. John to Levis, cross at Quebec, and so to Winnipeg over the Transcontinental system. That is what I had in mind. Surely the hon. member would not think that when we were running two through passenger trains a day between Halifax and Levis on the Government sys-

tern we were going to ran another train over the Transcontinental between Moncton and Levis, with practically no passengers.


William Pugsley: What did the minister mean when he gave the assurance that there would be an improved service? At the time that the minister made the statement, and before, passengers were able, though with these delays, through the mixed service, freight and passenger, to go from Moncton to Winnipeg entirely over the Government system. That was in effect at that time. But the minister assured us that we would have this new service. If all that the minister intended was that we were simply to have the service that we have to-day, then he must have- spoken in ignorance of the conditions existing at that time. The minister says that it would be useless to establish a passenger train service since we 'have one on the Intercolonial.


John Dowsley Reid: I mean through passenger
trains.


William Pugsley: The Transcontinental
railway was built for the purpose of making a transcontinental road between the Atlantic and the Pacific, it is a splendid line, passing through the best country and the people of the Maritime Provinces and the West have a right, within a reasonable time, to a proper service. You cannot build up the country and you cannot encourage travel unless you give the people proper accommodation. From the very day that the Canadian Pacific was open through to St. John they had a regular passenger service and they have developed that traffic. Today they are doing a very laTge passenger business. That is what I understood from the minister was intended and I am very sorry indeed because he led us, in the lower provinces, to believe that we were going to have the transcontinental railway developed and a real transcontinental service, both passenger and freight, established.


Mr. LEMIEUX:: I would like to call the attention of the hon. the Minister of Railways and Canals to the station at Levis. Levis is possibly the most important point between Montreal and New Brunswick. The station was destroyed by fire two or three years ago and the Government have erected a station which is simply a shack and which is very unworthy of the administration of the Intercolonial. Of course,
I understand that during war time the Government is not disposed to spend any considerable amount of money or as much as they would spend for a station at a place

of the -importance of Levis. At the same time, from my own personal experience, from what I have 'heard from passengers and from what the press in and around Quebec is saying about the matter, it seems to me that the department should, if it cannot this year undertake to provide a permanent station worthy of the place, make improvements to the present emergency station. The premises are unsanitary. I have been there in winter. I have seen, hundreds of passengers packed into a very close room, filled with smoke, women with children in their arms and no seats in the cold days , in winter when trains are usually late. I would ask my hon. friend, if he does not intend to build a permanent station now- and I understand why he cannot undertake large expenditures at the present time-to make improvements to the present temporary quarters so as to accommodate the public fairly well. The station could easily be enlarged so as to give the public a chance to move about especially in the winter. I am simply echoing public opinion in this matter. I have heard many passengers speak about it, I have read what the press has said about this station at Levis and I have had personal experience of its unsanitary condition. If the minister were to spend $5,000 he could give the public temporary accommodation which would be suitable until he builds his permanent station.


Francis Cochrane: We have in the Estimates $127,000 for a new station at Levis. If we do not go on with the new station I will see that the place is made sanitary and that proper accommodation is provided before winter.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I wish the minister to bring after dinner whatever information he may have regarding the reports, and expenditures, on the pedestals of the Salmon river viaduct in New Brunswick. I want to discuss that subject with him and I, of course, want him to have the information here unless he has it at hand at the present time.


Francis Cochrane: I will try and get it for my hon. friend; if not this evening, I will have it before my Estimates are finished.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Even if he does not have it, I would like to give him some information which has been placed in my hands and he can see whether it is correct or not and make whatever answer he wishes regarding it.


William Pugsley: While the Minister of Customs is here I want to refresh his memory by calling his attention to just what he said about the matter of a transcontinental service. He will find it at page 3042 of Hansard, April 19, 1916:
Mr. Pugsley:	I think you told them on one
occasion, if I remember aright, that if they thought Mr. Pugsley had not made large enough provision for harbour improvements to come to you as Minister of Customs-
That was referring to 1st. John-


John Dowsley Reid: I remember that.


William Pugsley: This may bring my hon. friend hack to it.
Mr. Reid:	The hon. member will remember
that since that statement was made, we have been trying to economize.
Mr. Pugsley:	Things have tightened up
pretty considerably.
Mr. Reid:	We expect to be running a
through train service from Halifax and St. John to Winnipeg on or about the first day of June.
Mr. Pugsley:	Of this year?
Mr. Reid:	Yes, that is what I meant. We
expect to run a through passenger service, with Pullman cars attached.


John Dowsley Reid: That is all right; I did not say that we were going to run them over the Intercolonial from Moncton to Levis. We have been for the last fifty years running through Pullmans between -Halifax, Moncton and Levis over the Intercolonial.


William Pugsley: That is what the minister meant? Then he goes further:
Mr. Pugsley:	Will that be a daily or a triweekly service?
Mr. Reid:	We will, at least, run a service
that will be satisfactory. We have ordered cars and we are trying to get more power as soon as possible, and I think that what we have done so far and the arrangements we have made for a through service ought to be satisfactory to the House and to the country.
The minister is speaking of the Transcontinental. I never dreamt he meant to simply continue the service we had over the Intercolonial railway, from St. John to Halifax.


John Dowsley Reid: If I remember rightly, there was a through service between Quebec and Cochrane.


William Pugsley: Yes.


John Dowsley Reid: And the intention was that
the through passengers could come from Halifax, St. John, and Moncton to Levis on the through Government passenger service, and at Quebec they could take the train through to Winnipeg, and travel the whple distance on the Government railway lines, and that statement which has just been read corroborates what I have stated.


William Pugsley: They had all that before them last year. The minister will tell you that.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What service is there
this summei from Montreal to Riviere Quelle and from Riviere Ouelle to Murray Bay? I was assured the other day, -and I think correctly-that the steamer service wpuld be continued. Is there a Pullman between Montreal and Riviere Ouelle, such as last year, and on what days will the Pullman be attached to the train for Riviere Ouelle?


Francis Cochrane: I think the service
will be the same as it has been for the last two years.


Rodolphe Lemieux: As the season is beginning, will the hon. gentleman consider a suggestion with reference to the days when this Pullman will be most acceptable to tourists? Of course, I am speaking, not only for the Canadian tourists, but for all the Americans who spend the summer at Murray Bay. A large number of American tourists, including former President Taft, were very much annoyed at the changes made last year in the Pullman service. I think, with a little good will in the department, everything could run smoothly. If the Pullman car, instead of returning to Montreal on Sunday morning, were to return Monday evening, it would be more convenient for tourists. If my hon. friend will accept some suggestions, I will send them to him.


Francis Cochrane: Certainly.


Mr. KYTE:: I would like to get some information as to the amount of money spent for betterments on the Intercolonial railway, from Point Tupper to Sydney during the past year.


Francis Cochrane: I will obtain that information for the hon. gentleman.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Would the minister
bring down what correspondence he may have, between parties interested and Mr. Gordon Grant and himself, as to the pedestal of the Salmon River viaduct?


Francis Cochrane: I will bring what I can; I do not know that I have it.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess.
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Frank Oliver: I wish to make some inquiries in regard to traffic on the- Transeon-

tinental between Winnipeg and Quebec. When were the Tails connected between Quebec and Winnipeg?


Francis Cochrane: I will have to get that information; I do not remember.


Frank Oliver: What were the rates on
grain last winter over the Transcontinental between Winnipeg and Quebec?


Francis Cochrane: The same as the year before. The information is in Hansard of last year.


Frank Oliver: What were those rates?


Francis Cochrane: Six cents a bushel
from Armstrong to Quebec.


Frank Oliver: What was the approximate amount of grain transported between Winnipeg and Quebec last winter?


Francis Cochrane: I do not remember
that; I will have to get the information.


Frank Oliver: Was the amount considerable?


Francis Cochrane: I am not sure.


Frank Oliver: Was it equal to the amount transported in the previous year?


Francis Cochrane: I do not think it was as great.,


Frank Oliver: Has the department in
contemplation such arrangements as will induce a larger proportion of western wheat to take the Transcontinental route during the coming season?


Francis Cochrane: That is pretty hard to say. Wheat is routed by the man sending it. We named a very low rate last year, largely because the elevators were full at Fort William, excepting some on the Canadian Pacific railway, which barred wheat shipped by the Transcontinental. For that reason we established a low rate from Armstrong to the Montreal and Quebec elevators.


Frank Oliver: The Transcontinental
Railway has been completed for a number of years under the administration of this Government, and we should now know whether it is possible to secure the advantage of the transportation of the western crop over that road. There is no doubt that the excessive manipulation of grain prices during the past spring was a direct result of the failure of the grain to go forward to the Atlantic seaboard during the winter. The grain was held either in the interior elevators or at Fort William, and became the subject of price manipulation,

to the very great detriment of the public. The results of this manipulation were felt particularly by the eastern public who, being in larger numbers, naturally consume more flour than the western public, although both suffered. If there is to be no relief from that condition; if grain is not to go forward all the year round as was intended when the Transcontinental was built, the country will continue to>
be subject to such dangers of price manipulation as prevailed last winter. Is it contrary to Government policy that the road should be used in that way, or is it a question of impossibility?


Francis Cochrane: The Government is
not opposed to the shipment of grain or anything else over the Transcontinental. At the close of, navigation, shippers object to sending the grain over the Transcontinental to Quebec, because of the difficulties in the way of further shipment. Portland, New York and Boston are more easily reached from Montreal than St. John and Halifax from Quebec. We should be very glad to take charge of shipments of grain, particularly in the winter, when very little traffic is moving. Local traffic on the Transcontinental is limited, and will he limited for some time. WTe shall be glad to get shipments of anything in order to keep the trains moving.


Frank Oliver: The minister will appreciate the query that is in the minds of the people of the West in this connection if he makes a comparison between the present summer rate from Port Arthur across the lake-which, I am credibly informed, is seven cents a bushel-


Francis Cochrane: That is to Montreal.


Frank Oliver: I understand not. I am informed that the rate is applicable from Port Arthur to Buffalo or Midland. To that is added the rail rate from Midland to Montreal or from Buffalo to New York. When we compare that summer rate by lake and rail with the all-rail rate that the department put in the winter before last, and which prevailed again last winter, we reach the inevitable conclusion that there is something wrong somewhere. It may be admitted that grain can be carried by lake cheaper than by rail, but it must be admitted also that if the lake rate, which can be taken advantage of only during a few months in the year, is higher than the rail rate, which can be taken advantage of during the whole year, the railroad should be carrying that grain. If it is not, then the

blame is upon those who have charge of the railroad's business. The business is there; the rates are such as to admit of the business being handled. If the business is not handled, the respdnsibility rests upon the management of the railway.


Francis Cochrane: The statement made by my hon. friend is not true in any sense of the word.


Frank Oliver: I do not wish to get into a discussion with my hon. friend-


Francis Cochrane: I do not wish such a statement as the hon. gentleman has made to go to the country unchallenged.


Frank Oliver: I have to ask you, Mr. Chairman, to rule that my hon. friend is out of order in declaring that a statement made by me is not true.


Francis Cochrane: It is not true. We can only take what grain is given us by the Grand Trunk Pacific.


Frank Oliver: I ask for your ruling, Mr. Chairman.


The CHAIRMAN:: It is against the rules of the House to say that a statement made by another member is not true.


Frank Oliver: I do not wish to get into a heated controversy, but, with all due respect to the minister, I cannot submit to a statement such as he has made without its becoming the means of arousing a controversy. He will understand, therefore, why I called the attention of the Chairman to his language. The matter to which I refer is of the gravest importance to the people of Canada, particularly to the people of the West.
I am within my rights and my duties in this House in calling attention to the facts as they exist. If I have not stated those facts correctly I shall be glad to be corrected, but the statements I have made are according to the information I have. It is a fact that the rate on the Transcontinental from Armstrong to Quebec is six cents a bushel, and it is a fact that the rate from Fort William to Midland is seven cents a bushel; that is to say, it is costing more to haul the grain in the summer time from Fort William to the seaboard than it cost all last winter to haul grain over the rails of the Transcontinental. Now, was that because there was not rolling stock for that railway? Was it because there were not such terminal facilities on the Atlantic coast as there should have been? Was it because it was contrary to the policy of the
Government to use that railway? I ask these questions. The country is entitled to an answer.


Joseph Hormisdas Rainville: Shall the item be carried?


Frank Oliver: If the minister does not think these questions are worthy of answer I shall have to make what further remarks I desire to make in this connection without the courtesy of his consideration. The facts being as I have stated them, this Government will have to stand charged with the responsibility of having taken over a great national public work, and, after having completed that work, of having deliberately and of intent, neglected, or failed, to use it for the purpose for which it was intended, which purpose it was absolutely calculated to serve; and doing so to the detriment of Canada, both east and west. I desire to bring these facts to the attention of the House and of the country for the purpose of emphasizing the point that, so far as this Government, at any rate, is concerned, Government administration of railways is not a success. If this is the result of administration by this Government of the Transcontinental railway between Quebec and Winnipeg i't certainly would be suicidal for this country to place the administration of more railways in their hands. We can only regret that circumstances are such as to have placed that stretch of railway in their hands at this time, when, above all other times, it could have been used to the good of the country instead of being allowed to lie idle. Of last year's crop, the returns show that over 150,000,000 bushels found their outlet to the Atlantic seaboard by way of the United States. The carriage of those 150,000,000 bushels belonged to Canada. The Transcontinental railway was built by Canada for the purpose of carrying that wheat. The loss of the carriage of that grain was a loss to the revenues of Canada as well as to the revenues of the railway administration. It is necessary that these facts should be known in order that, when we are told that Canada is overbuilt with railroads, it should be thoroughly understood that Canada has business for her railroads, and that this Government, having control over this railroad, refused to take business over it.


Francis Cochrane: What grain or other
commodity did we refuse to handle on the Transcontinental ?


Frank Oliver: I shall have to explain
my statement as it will be understood by every one who cares to listen. No person

would suppose that if I took a load of wheat to the management of the Transcontinental and asked them to ship it I would he refused the privilege of shipping it; but if the Transcontinental doe's not fit itself with rolling-stock or terminal facilities, or does not take care of business when it comes, that in'effect is refusal of business, and that is certainly what has taken place.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: If my hon. friend (Mr. Olivier) cannot get an answer from the minister, I will bring to the minister's attention another matter in connection with the Transcontinental, and I hope he will be able to give me some information in regard to it. I refer to some repairs done to and reports made upon the Salmon river viaduct in New Brunswick. This viaduct was completed about 1909 or 1910. It is, I understand, the highest and longest viaduct on the system, and I think, the highest viaduct in Canada east of the Rooky mountains. It is about three-quarters of a mile long and about 200 feet high in the centre. There are fifty or sixty pedestals on which the feet of the different portions of the steel work rest, and to my personal knowledge, when that work was under construction, a great deal of care and attention was paid to it to see that everything was properly constructed. I remember in this House, some time before the election in 1911, when all the questions as to the kind of material that was to go into that viaduct were discussed. We were told that the contractors brought material at first some 125 miles; then they found material nearer that the engineers claimed, after it had been tested out at Ottawa, would be satisfactory, and the engineers used all their skill and ability to make that viaduct a permanent structure. All went well until 1915, when some men commenced to dig holes aTound the side of some of the pedestals. These pedestals are. only three or four feet thick at the top and shaped like an obelisk, and they would not be more than three or four feet *out of the ground, the greater part of them *being under ground. The contractors had to dig down until they came to a solid foundation. When these men commenced to dig a few holes around the sides of the pedestals, people wondered what they were doing. At first it was thought they were digging for the purpose of doing damage. It may be interesting to the minister to know that a gentleman who, in the beginning worked on the construction of those pedestals and who was then working as a fireman in a sawmill nearby, wrote to me wonder-f'Mr. Oliver.]
ing if the Germans were attempting to blow up the pedestals of this bridge. It turned out, however, that they were not Germans, but simply employees of the minister who were digging these holes for the purpose of making an examination.
On the 29th of December, 1915, a report was made by Mr. Duff, the substance of which was as follows: The pedestals under that viaduct cost $110,973, while they should have cost only $83,259. Tn other words, the contractors, practically with the connivance of the engineers, are reported to have stolen $27,714 from the country by not putting in the pedestals the amount of concrete which they said they did. If you can imagine, Sir, a more serious charge against bona fide contractors and engineers, from the district engineer down to the resident engineer, than that I should like to know what it is. In order that the minister may appreciate the full significance of this report, I will put it in another way. They claim that $27,000 worth of concrete had been paid for, not a yard of which had 'been put in the pedestals, that representing 1,960 cubic yards at 11 cents a yard. They .also claim that included in that figure there was a small amount of excessive excavation. The engineers and contractors, when this came to their attention, naturally took drastic steps to have the matter straightened out. The minister will remember that I went to him myself some time in the month of April or May, just after he had returned from the south, in 1916. I told him that I had letters from the engineers and contractors, in which they not only requested, but demanded, that these pedestals be uncovered and offered, if the Government would not uncover them, to uncover them themselves at their own expense if the Government would allow them to do so, so that they could show to the minister and the world that this report was unfounded, false, and malicious. I do not blame the minister at all for the character of the investigation which must 'have 'been made by his officials, because I do not think he knew anything about it. It was done, I presume, under the instructions of the then manager of the Government railways, who seems to have had a mania for finding fault with the Transcontinental, in the hope of showing that it was 'a great piece of corruption from beginning to end. I do not know what has led to the retirement of that gentleman.


Francis Cochrane: $5,000 more salary.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: While I think the
Liberal party has lost its greatest asset in his retirement, still it is a good thing for

Canada that he has gone. If the amount had been five cents, that is about his size, and I think he would have taken it. However, I am not here to discuss that. From the time the Minister of Railways put thai man in charge of the Government Railways he has done nothing but make trouble, and whenever he could make a report or give information detrimental to the Transcontinental it gave him the greatest delight.
I want to .show something of the character of the report which the minister received and acted upon. I have only got fragments of the story, but such as they are I gladly give them to him, and I hope at some future date the minister will be able to furnish the committee with the remainder of the data. Away back as early as the 12th of October 1915, Mr. Duff submitted a report to Mr. Gutelius .showing the character of the work which they found under these pedestals. The pedestals, I might explain, are in pairs and are designated No. 1 right, No. 1 left, No. 2 right, No. 2 left, and so on. The bridge sheets show that there should have been 99.16 cuibic yards in No. 4 right, whereas as a matter of fact there were only 57 cubic yards, or a difference of 42.16 cubic yards.- An actual steal of about 40 to 50 per cent. If these contractors and engineers put in only 57 instead of 99 cubic yards in a pedestal supporting a bridge 200 feet high, and then charged for 99 cubic yards and made the public believe they had put in that amount, those men were criminals, and if the minister believed the report he should have had them prosecuted. There is not a man in this House but will agree with me that these men were criminals if, in a bridge of the magnitude I have indicated, over which the traffic of this great transcontinental system was to be carried, they put only 57 cubic yards in the pedestals that required 99 cubic yards.
With respect to No. 13 right, the plan as shown on the bridge sheets calls for 129.49 cubic yards., and the engineers reported that only 89.7 cubic yards were put in, or a difference of 39-79. There again, if these facts are true, every man who had anything to do with the work should have been, prosecuted and sent to the penitentiary for as long a term as possible.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Does the hon. gentleman assert that there was this shortage.''


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I say it did not occur. I assert that the statements in the report are absolutely false. If the shortage did
occur, I say that the minister should have prosecuted these men, but I repeat that it did not occur. I shall be able to give some of the facts, and I hope the minister will furnish the Committee with the rest, for he has the whole of them.
There was an individual report on each pedestal. Some of them were shown* to be all right; in others the concrete was claimed to be soft, in others very soft. In some cases it is claimed that a pier that was supposed to have at the base 10 feet, let us say, of solid concrete, had only one foot; in other words, instead of having ten feet of solid concrete from the hard pan up, in order to make a good foundation for the great sturcture, only one foot of concrete was put in, and the remainder was sand. When these facts were investigated further, we found that thgse reports were all false.
I have blue prints here of all the pedestals, nearly 100 of them. There is a plan of each pedestal as it was supposed to have been constructed, and a plan marked over the original showing how the pedestal was constructed according to this report, indicating that there was a shortage of about 30 to 40 per cent, and consequently a steal to that extent.
The contractors for the wprk were as responsible a firm of contractors as ever did business in Canada, Messrs. Powers' & Brewer. These gentlemen began doing business on the Canadian Pacific, they have done business in Nova Scotia, and they are doing business to-day in New Brunswick, and they bear as honorable a name as any contractors in the Dominion. The district engineer was Mr. C. O. Foss who has been connected with railway work in Canada all his lifetime. The divisional engineer was Mr. Balloch. Both of these gentlemen have the highest reputation in their profession. I am not able to say who the resident engineers were. As soon as this report became known, of -course a protest went up. The first protest was made by the contractor, and I want to read to the minister a letter sent by these contractors to the chief engineer of the Transcontinental railway:
March 15 th, 1917.
Gordon Grant, Esq.,
Chief Engineer, Transcontinental Railway Commission,
Ottawa.
Dear Sir,
We have received from Mr. Longley copy of Mr. Duff's report on the Little Salmon River pedestals, and the bridge sheets of same showing concrete as returned and also as Mr. Duff claims it was actually constructed.

The charges of over return are absolutely false, and this statement can be easily proven by properly uncovering his most glaring misrepresentations, pedestals 2 R. and L.
We think you should demand that the Government make an independent examination, in justice to all the engineers who were in any way connected with the work, and more particularly ourselves as contractors.
We would be glad to have you advise us if they will do this, and if so, when, so that we may be present and see the pedestals uncovered.
Yours very truly, Powers & Brewer, per H. H. Brewer.
It would take too much time to go through all the correspondence so I will only briefly refer to some of the letters that passed. The contractors demanded that these pedestals, No. 2 right and No. 2 left, be taken, because they were near the bank and it was easy to get at them and they were willing to make these a test of the whole thing. They were willing to try any of them at all, 'but they chose these for the reason I have already given and because they were reported as 'being among the most vicious of all. No. 2 left was the .one concerning which it was said that, after you got to the base of the shaft and came to the pedestal, where there should have been twelve feet of concrete there was only one foot .of concrete. I say again that any firm of contractors, or any engineers that would put in one foot of concrete where there should be twelve, are criminals of the blackest character. It is no wonder that these men protested and demanded that the work should be uncovered, that it might show for itself. I have the correspondence regarding No. 2 pedestal, and I will refer briefly to that correspondence.
First I will call attention to a letter frpm Mr. Duff to Mr. Gordon Grant, stating that they were starting in to repair the substructure, and that if anybody wanted to be present he could attend. Then there is a letter from Mr. Gordon Grant to Messrs. Powers & Brewer which I will read in full:
Ottawa, June Sth, 1916. Messrs. Powers and Brewer,
Contractors, 107 Prince William Street,
St. John, N.B.
Re Little Salmon River.
Dear Sirs,
For your information I enclose herewith copy of letter I have received from W. A. Duff I.C.R. Engineer of Bridges, which speaks for itself. I am sending you this in case you should want to visit the bridge while it is under repair, and you can see for yourself whether or not the representations made by Mr. Duff are correct.
You may notify Mr. Poss, in case he should be sufficiently interested in the matter, to also visit the bridge.

The remainder of the letter merely refers to the fact that the minister had been away and was then busy. Then followed a letter from Messrs. Powers & Brewer to Mr. Gordon Grant, dated I6th June, 1916, acknowledging Mr. 'Grant's letter and proceeding:
We note from Mr. Duff's report of December 29th, 1915, that he intends to entirely rebuild pedestals 10 R. and 11 R., hut the repairs to others will only be to first footing.
If Mr. Duff will advise us when excavation for 10 R. and 11 R. we would like to be present. We would also like to have Mr. Duff uncover the foundations of 2 R. or L. and 15 R. or L. at the same time.	-
No. 15 right was one of the had ones 'according to the first repprt, and 13 right was another very bad one. Then there was a telegram dated 17th July, 1916, from Mr. Brewer to Mr. Duff: [DOT]
Have had no reply to our letter of June 16th to Gordon Grant, copy of which we presume has been forwarded to you. I plan on being at Salmon River Thursday, twentieth, and would like to see pedestal two uncovered. Please wire reply.
H. H. Brewer.
On 18th July, the following answer was sent to Mr. Brewer:
Your wire of seventeenth to hand. Mr. Duff is away at present, will not be back until Thursday.
Regarding the uncovering of pedestals 2 and 15 at Little Salmon River, Mr. Duff is making arrangements to have these pedestals uncovered right away.
He will write and let you know when they are ready for inspection.
This was followed by a letter from Messrs. Power & Brewer to Mr. Gordpn Grant, dated 19th June:
Yours of 16th instant enclosing copy of Mr. Duff's letter of June 13th received.
Would it not be possible for you to arrange with Mr. Duff to have the excavating around pedestals No. 2 done at once?
Then there is the following letter from Mr. Duff to Messrs. Powers & Brewer:
Moncton, N.B., August 11th, 1916. Messrs. Powers and Brewer,
Contractors,
107 Prince William Street,
St. John, N.B.
Little Salmon River Viaduct.
Gentlemen:
Referring to your letter of June 19th to Mr. Gordon Grant and my letter to Mr. H. H. Brewer of the 11th July.
We have now excavated to the bottom of foundation of pedestal 2 R, and I will be obliged if you will make arrangements to visit the site of the bridge for the purpose of inspecting this at an early date, as it will not do for us to leave the foundation uncovered very long.
I am sorry that we have been unable to uncover pedestal No. 15 R or L. as yet on

account of water conditions. Will you please advise me when you will visit the site of the bridge, as I would like to be there at the same time if possible.
Yours truly,


W. A. Duff.
[Stage Direction]
This, it will 'be seen, is a notification that they have excavated to the bottom of pedestal No. 2 right. If they had done so, there could not be very much difficulty in finding out who was right and who was wrong. Mr. Brewer sends back a letter dated 15th August, 1916, addressed to 'Mr. Duff:
Yours of 11th instant received. We have had No. 2 pedestal examined by Mr. M. J. Powers of Grand Falls, and he advises us that in his opinion your excavation does not reach the bottom of the pedestal but only to a set of walling timbers inside the sheet piling.
He advises that it would not be of any use for me to go up until he is satisfied that the excavation has been carried to bottom of footing course. Will you please have this done, and X would then be pleased to meet you there.
Then, on August 22, there is another letter to Mr. Duff from Messrs. Powers & Brewer, as follows:
Please advise if you are arranging for further excavation of No. 2 pedestal as asked for in our letter of 15th instant.
We are anxious to have the letter cleared up as soon as possible.
Mr. Duff answers on 26th August:
We are arranging for further excavation of pedestal No. 2 and will advise you as soon as I get definite information with regard to same.
It will be noted that three weeks before this they had reported to the engineer that they had uncovered No. 2 pedestal. The contractor sent a man there who saw that they had not uncovered it at all. And on the 26th August they say:	"We are arranging for further excavation," and " will advise you." And they did. On the 22nd September they wrote again:
Referring to your letter of the 22 nd of August, and mine of the 26th of August.
We have excavated as far down as pedestal No. 2 as it is safe for us to do-
They did not go to the bottom, but the^ excavated as far as it was safe to do.
.-and we have drilled an inch and a half hole through the footing course, and find it to be eight feet thick.
Will you please advise me if you wish to examine this pedestal any further, as we wish to fill in the excavation within a short time?
Then, to follow the history of that one transaction, Mr. Duff did not hesitate to report to the minister and to the country that responsible engineers and contractors had built a pedestal one foot thick when it should have been 11 or 12 feet thick under
a bridge of the magnitude of that which I have described, or to say that he had dug down and uncovered one side of every pedestal in the whole bridge. If you want confirmation of that, you will find it in the report in which they say they dug down one side to the bottom, and assuming that this pedestal was square they figured out the contents. Here is a case where they reported one foot of concrete. But the contractor said: "You are wrong." He even said worse than that. They were sent back and they dug again, and they went down a little way and they said: "We were to the bottom." The contractor sent a man down to look at it, and he said: "You are not at the bottom." They said: "We will dig a little further," and they went on and dug eight feet, and still they did not go to the bottom. Then they would not dig any more, and they tried to drill, but they admitted that they never got to the bottom. They admit eight feet of solid concrete in their report instead of only one foot. I would like to know what the minister has to say of engineers who are making reports of that class, and thereby attempting to blast the reputation of honourable men who are trying to earn an honest living. I have given the facts regarding this No. 2 pedestal. They said that it was not necessary to go to the bottom to show that it was proper work, but Mr. C. O. Foss, the district engineer, followed these men to the very end. The contractors did not propose to be put in a false light by these men if they could help it. However, I do not believe that it was Mr. Duff; I believe the real man behind him was Mr. Gutelius. They reached the point, in the month of October, I think, when Duff had to say that he would not dig any further. Finally he named a day when he would be present to go over the work with Messrs. Powers and Brewer. He said that it would be some day next week. Mr. Brewer, who was the man having charge of the work, remained in St. John a whole week, but never was called upon, and finally was notified by Duff that he had to go away and could not meet him, but that he would send one of his assistants. Duff did not dare to go on the work with Powers and Brewer, and therefore sent his subordinate. The subordinate went there.
Mr. COPP:: Do the papers give the name of the subordinate?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Yes, Mr. Leightner,
representing Duff, and the representatives of the contracting firm appeared on the ground. I have in my possession, and I

want to read, a letter addressed by C. O. Foss, district engineer, to Gordon Grant, dated the 7th November, 1916, which purports to give the result of that interview. If this be true, and the minister will know whether it is or not, it reveals a condition of affairs for which the minister ought to make a public apology to these contractors and to the engineers connected with the matter. It is as follows:
Nov. 7th, 1916.
Gordon Grant, Esq.,
Chief Engineer, N.T.R.
Little Salmon River Viaduct.
Dear Sir:-
Since your communication of the 8th of June I have tried, in conjunction with Messrs. Powers and Brewer, to get something definite from Mr. Duff either confirming or disproving his charges of last year, As you know we asked to have the foundations of pedestals Nos. 2 and 15 uncovered as two of the most glaring examples he had1 reported of work that was not done. On August 11th he wrote me that he had excavated down to the bottom of foundation of pedestal No. 2R and notified me that if I wanted to inspect it I must do so at an early date as he would not leave the excavation open very long.
On the same date he wrote Powers and Brewer to the same effect and added in tihe letter to them that he had not been able to excavate down to the bottom of the foundation of No. 15 owing to water conditions. This was not surprising to us as we knew that it would be absolutely impossible to excavate to the bottom of either of these pedestals without the use of a powerful pump, though from his report of last year he apparently had no trouble from water conditions then. On the day we received the letters from Duff, Mr. Powers' brother, who lives at Grand Falls and was watching the work, reported that they had not reached the bottom of No. 2R, and Mr. Brewer so notified Mr. Duff. Some time later, on September 22nd, he wrote Brewer that they had excavated as far down on pedestal No. 2R as it was safe for them to do and had drilled an inch and a half hole through the footing course and found it 8 feet thick.
Following this there was considerable more correspondence which culminated in an agreement by Mr. Brewer to meet Mr. Duff on the site upon the receipt of a wire; finally Duff wrote and wired that his assistant Mr. Leightner would meet him or his representative on Tuesday, October 31st, and as Mr. Brewer had already made an engagement in Montreal for that date he had to send his accountant and Powers whom I have mentioned before. As a result of that meeting we have the following admissions.
This is the point. I am reading now from a statement by Mr. Foss to the chief engineer, and the minister will know whether that statement is correct or not.
In the case of No. 2R as I have already stated he admits that he has drilled through a footing 8 feet thick instead of one foot as reported last year. In the case of No. 10R they removed it altogether and admit that it was 13-6 deep, being nearly 2 feet more than they 
found last year. No. 150R they admit is 14-7 to bottom, which is nearly 5 feet more than they found last year. No. 4R they found nearly 5 feet more than last year, and at No. 13R about 4 feet more. They state that Mr. Leightner is prepared to admit that the report of last year is not correct. Of course this is quite superfluous as the figures given prove that. I am quite satisfied that if they will send another investigating party there who is anxious to get the truth they will find the balance which they claim is still lacking as shown by our bridge sheets. Mr. Brewer and self intend to interview Mr. Brown soon with a view to learning his attitude with regard to the matter of last year's charges in the light of the information obtained this summer. If you put the figures I have given you on your sheets you will see at a glance how the matter stands under their present , claim. I trust you will bring the matter to the attention of the minister in order that he may understand that by their own present findings we are relieved of the great part of the charges made last year.	.
All the answer there is to that is a simple acknowledgement by Mr. Grant stating that he had forwarded a copy of the letter to the minister, and as it was forwarded to the minister, no doubt he caused an investigation to be made, and he will be able to tell us whether the admission of Mr. Leightner is correct or not. I am sorry that my voice is in such a condition that I will not be able to follow this up very much further. I do not intend to weary the committee by going into the details at any greater extent. I have shown the minister two things. First, his engineers reported to him that they had made an actual investigation of every one of those pedestals, when they did not. There is no getting away from that. These men never measured those pedestals, and I doubt very much if they ever measured any single pedestal out of the whole hundred. That is a pretty strong statement. In the first place, there could not be very many of them measured without very extensive pumping arrangements, because that is in a great valley, and when those pedestals were put down, they had to pump water continuously, and the cost was much more excessive than they imagined it would be, on account of the difficulty in keeping the water out of the cofferdam. They never could have measured down to the bottom of any of them, and we have now the admission of four or five of these people that what they did make was all wrong, in Nos. 2, 4, 10 and 13; because, in this case, they dug down and found they were all wrong. They blasted out concrete which was as solid as anything could possibly be in this world, unless if were steel.
I will bring samples and show them to the minister. I have a sample of rock blasted out of one of the pedestals, where the con-

Crete was so solid and firm that the blasting broke the rock, instead of breaking the concrete, and I think the minister received samples of the same kind, where they blew these pedestals out with dynamite, in order to put in new ones. I do not know how many men they have employed there, but they must have squandered at least $00,000 or $70,000 in carrying on this unnecessary work, and for what purpose I cannot imagine. I know it was used as a political machine. I know that scores of men were employed upon it, for the purpose of getting their votes at the next provincial election, and they did not get the votes, if that is any satisfaction to the minister.
I know thousands of dollars	were
thrown into the pockets of Mr. White, who ran a general store at Grand Falls, and who was then representing the county in the local legislature, but he is not representing it now. I know it was the greatest piece of political * jugglery that has taken place in New Brunswick in my day. There was probably $50,000 or $60,000 of public money absolutely wasted in tearing out concrete piers, which would have been there a thousand years hence, if left alone, and they replaced them with concrete piers, no better than the former ones.


Arthur Bliss Copp: What year was this done?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Last year, when the provincial elections were coming on, and I suppose they expected a Dominion election as well.' This is one of the greatest scandals, considering the amount of money involved, that has ever taken place in that country. It is a by-word among the people for miles and miles around. I have letters, which I suppose I should not refer to, from engineers on the American side of the boundary line, who heard about this business and came over, not one but many, to see what kind of butchery the Government was carrying on. I have received correspondence from these engineers stating their opinions about it. And yet the minister squandered all this money, and has nothing to show for it, excepting, I suppose, he will say he knows now what the bottoms are. The bottoms were' there all right, but the $60,000 or $70,000 is gone. We can forgive him if he will publicly apologize to the men who have been slandered by his general manager and the officials of his department. That- will atone to some extent for the wrong done by this piece of political jobbery.


Francis Cochrane: The hon. gentleman from Carleton told me this afternoon that he intended to bring this matter before the committee. I told him that I had not all the papers here, and I wante4 him to postpone it, but he said he would rather not. In reference to his charges against Mr. Gutelius he is absolutely unfair, because what first brought it to the general manager's notice was the resident engineer, Mr. R. A. Black, reporting to the superintendent, Mr. H. B. Fleming, on an examination made by him of the substructure of the Salmon river viaduct on the National Transcontinental east of Grand Falls station, and finds there is a rise of ten inches in the first span going into the bridge. This is due to a settlement of the abutment and the girders should be jacked up to place, and the bridge seat raised to the proper level either with concrete or capstones, also that many of the pedestals are in a bad and dangerous shape, on account of defective concrete having been used, etc.
I have a short report of what was done, as follows:
During the past summer repairs to the substructure of this bridge were carried out under the supervision of Mr. James Finley, and twenty pedestals in all were repaired, these being 3R, 3L, 4R, 4>L, 5R, 5L, 6L, 7R, 7L, 8R, SL, 9R, 9L, 10R, 10D, HR, 12R, 15D, 19L and 25L. The details of the repairs which were done to these pedestals are given in report dated the 10th of November, from Mr. Finley to me, covering the work done during the past summer, copy of which report I attach hereto.
You will note in Mr. Finley's report that he recommends that the following pedestals should be repaired next year:-11L, 13L, 14L, 28R, 28L, 34L, 37L, 39L and 43R.
During the present summer the actual size of the following six pedestals were determined : -2R, 4R, 2L, 10R, 13R and 15R. Pedestals 2R, 4R, 4D and 13R were measured in the presence of Messrs. Powers and Tilley of the firm of Powers and Brewer, Finley, Oulton, Bridge and Building Master Turner and Assistant Engineer G. C. Leightner. It was necessary to entirely remove pedestal 10R, and pedestal 15R was excavated to the bottom of the foundation under Mr. Finley and the depth of the foundation thus determined. The measurements of these pedestals show that there is one hundred and forty-two yards less concrete in them than is Shown on original bridge sheets.
I would like to call your attention particularly to the quality of the concrete taken out of the pedestals which were repaired this year, as shown in Mr. Finley's report.
The repairs which were undertaken this year under the supervision of Mr. Finley bear out fully the information given in my report of December 28, 1915, to you, as to the quality of the concrete and the necessity for making the repairs. When the concrete was taken out of the pedestals, the quality of same was found, if anything, to be worse than indicated in my report to you and some idea of the quality of the original concrete put in these pedestals may be obtained from looking at photographs

attached to Mr. Finley's report of pedestals HR and 12R.
On October 1 sent Mr. G. C. Leightner, Assistant Engineer, to this bridge to meet Messrs. Joe Powers and Tilley of the firm of Powers and Brewer, and he examined the foundation of pedestals 2R, 4R, 4L and 13'R in their presence and also in the presence of Messrs. Finley, Oulton and Bridge and Building Master Turner. Mr. Lightner reported to me in connection with pedestal 2R as follows:
"A rod was thrust into the hole which Mr. Finley had bored through the footing and depth measured as a little over eight feet. A rod was then driven some three feet further and then pulled out and the last three feet of the rod were found to be covered with mud. Mr. Tilley was satisfied to accept the thickness of eight feet which Mr. Finley had reported, but Mr. Powers, however, was still sceptical and asked to have another hole drilled in the footing so that he could watch the drilling. Mr. Finley offered to do this for him if he, Mr. Powers, would pay the expense of drilling providing Mr. Finley's finding of eight feet was confirmed. This offer was not accepted. Mr. Powers gave his ground for belief in this pedestal extending deeper, that the man who inspected the work on this pedestal was on his first job of inspection and, he said, would therefore be most careful to have the work done in accordance with the plans."
In connection with pedestal 4R, Mr. Lightner reports:
"Giving them-the contractors-the benefit of every doubt, we concluded the measurement to be 13{ 11" from the top of the pedestal to the pedestal to the top of the bottom footing and 16' 7" from the top of the pedestal to the bottom of the bottom footing. The bridge sheet shows these two dimensions as 13.7' and 17.7', or 1.1' deeper than we found."
With regard to pedestal 4L, he reports:
"The total depth is 2' 4" less than shown on the bridge sheet."
With regard to pedestal 13R, Mr, Lightner reports the total height to be 2' 6" less than shown on the bridge sheet.
Mr. Leightner's report says:	"Got very
little satisfaction from either Mr. Powers or Mr. Tilley as to the quality of the concrete which had been removed. They both se<?med to think that the concrete when first put in, although the gravel might not have been as good as possible, was of good quality, and that their workmanship had been as good as ordinary, and that the present condition of the pedestals was due to deterioration which might happen to concrete any place.	They cited several
examples of work in Nova Scotia, which I understood they had built and were now having to rebuild. As to the quality of the gravel which was used, Mr. Powers was inclined to blame the engineers in charge; that is, he stated that the engineers in charge inspected and passed all material used, and if unsatisfactory got into the work, it was not the contractors' fault.
My opinion from the appearance of the broken concrete which had been removed from the pedestals _ is that in general the concrete was poorly mixed, not properly tamped in the forms, contained insufficient cement and somewhat dirty aggregate and altogether too large a quantity of plums, some of them not judicially placed.''
I have some photographs here, and I leave it to any man who examines them to

say whether the concrete is good. Several of the photographs show that the concrete could be picked out without blasting or anything of that kind. Some portions of the cement are good, but others are not. In a bridge of that size, bad concrete is apt to crumble out; the work can hardly he said to be proper if there is a had mixture of cement. If Mr. Powers, wants to be prosecuted in the matter, I think that we can put up a case that will hang him.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: You had better go to work and do it, then.


Francis Cochrane: I shall be very glad to get a full report and present it later.


Frank Oliver: On a previous occasion the attention of the minister was directed to the so-called embargo which was put upon the shipment of grain from the prairie west during last fall and winter. I offer no apology for mentioning the matter again and asking the minister whether there is, under the authority with which he is vested, any remedy for that condition; because when a shipment of grain is refused, a serious loss is suffered by the owner who desires to ship it.


Francis Cochrane: Where was the embargo placed?


Frank Oliver: On all lines in Alberta from the Canadian Pacific Railway main line north as far as the Saskatchewan river. Notices were issued from time to time by the railway companies that they would not take grain for shipment to Port William or to Minneapolis-though they would take grain for shipment to the interior elevators. There is no doubt that tlie railway companies did this under the authority of the Railway Commission. I want to know, on behalf of the people interested, if there is any authority higher than the Railway Commission. Have the people of western Canada any remedy in this matter, which, affecting, as it does, the shipment of their produce, is to them a matter, if not of actual, at any rate of profitable, existence?


Francis Cochrane: This is the first time that the putting on of an embargo by the railways has been drawn to my attention.
I will inquire into the matter. I will try to get the information for my hon. friend from the Railway Commission.


Frank Oliver: My hon. friend surely remembers our discussing the matter in the House on a previous occasion.


Francis Cochrane: When?


Frank Oliver: On the occasion, I think, of the Budget debate.


Francis Cochrane: I was not present then.


Frank Oliver: I know that there was an exchange between my hon. friend and myself on that subject on a previous occasion during this session. However, let it be noted that this is a matter in which the people are deeply interested. They want to know if the railway companies are being supported in their refusal to act as common carriers and to take freight to such destination as is indicated by the shipper. My information is that in a certain case a man had 17,000 bushels of threshed oats lying in his field contiguous to the Canadian Pacific main line a little east of Calgary, and the shipment of that grain to Fort William or Minneapolis was refused him by the railway company. That was one instance. It is a general case I desire to make my statement on, and I desire to get the best attention in regard to it.
Mr. COCHEANE.:	I will get the information.


Frank Oliver: The minister said a few
minutes ago that the Government had never refused to accept shipments over the Transcontinental. These three railroad systems in the Prairie West are naturally the feeders to the Transcontinental; it is over those lines or some of them, at any Tate, that the business must come that the Transcontinental shall handle, and when those railway companies refuse to take grain for shipment to Winnipeg or Fort William, of course, that business is not there for the Transcontinental to handle. If the minister, will pardon me for saying so, it seems a strange administration of a great railway [DOT]system in the hands of the Government of our country, when such a condition can exist without the knowledge of the head of that administration.
In regard to the removal of rails on the Grand Trunk Pacific west of Edmonton, in iwha't manner are the interests of the coal mines on either side of Jasper and Brule lakes being protected?


Francis Cochrane: The matter of the three transcontinental railways west of Winnipeg bringing goods to the Transcontinental for shipment does not require very much explanation, because two of them run Tight through to the Atlantic, and we have to depend on what the Grand Trunk Pacific brings to the Transcontinental.
So far as the removal of rails is concerned, my engineer returned on Saturday, on which day I unfortunately had to be away, I hope to-morrow to be able to ask my hon. friend
to change his question into an order for return, and I will endeavour to lay on the Table to-morrow full particulars in reference to that matter.


Frank Oliver: In regard to the lifting
of Tails on the Transcontinental between Winnipeg and Quebec, the House is entitled to a definite statement as to what rails have been lifted and as to how far the lifting of those rails might effect the successful operation of the railway.


Mr COCHEANE:: The first 300 miles of
rails have been lifted and are now either gone overseas or waiting for shipment. I will lay on the Table a plan showing where
those rails have been lifted.


Frank Oliver: How many tons of those rails are now piled on the dock at Three Eivers?


Francis Cochrane: I do not know. I will try to find out.


Mr. GEEMAN:: Two weeks ago the
minister stated in answer to a question of mine that the Government's policy in regard to the railway situation in Canada .would be announced very shortly. Will the policy of the Government regarding the railway situation in Canada, consequent on the two reports of the Eoyal Commissioners, be announced within the next few days?


Francis Cochrane: The Government is
not ready yet to make its announcement, and I cannot say just when it will be.


William Manley German: That answer is as indefinite as Government answers to questions of .that kind usually are. I do not know that I can blame the minister any more than any of his predecessors in regard to such answers, because that is the kind that is usually given. The railway situation in Canada, notwithstanding the great war that is going on, is the most serious proposition that Canada has to face. The war is undoubtedly a serious matter, but the present railway situation in Canada will, in the near future, tax the ability and energy of the best men that Canada can produce. The Government have appointed a Eoyal Commission consisting of three notable men of experience in railway matters, and those men have agreed that the Canadian Northern and the Grand Trunk Pacific are bankrupt, and that if the Grand Trunk Eailway Company is compelled to carry out its obligation entered into with the Government in regard to the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Transcontinental, the Grand Trunk



Railway Company will also become bankrupt. That being the situation, the Government should, in the interest of the country, immediately announce a policy on this very momentous and important question. I presume that the Government will do in this matter what it has hitherto done in regard to other matters of a similar kind, and what probably other governments have done in matters of equal importance, and that is, leave the question until the dying days of the session, and then bring in the most important legislation which will be before Parliament during this session, to be disposed of in four or five of the closing days of Parliament. I, for one, wish to protest most energetically against such a situatioh.' No further money should be voted in reference to the railway management in this country until the Government shall have announced its railway policy, because the matter is too important. I have no criticism to make against the Minister of Railways and Canals-, so far as my knowledge *of the situation is concerned, he is as good *a Minister of Railways as we have ever -had, and perhaps that is not damning him with very great praise. But the existing railway situation in Canada is too important to be trifled with or to be postponed until the closing days of the session, and I wish to give the minister warning now that he will hear from me about this matter in other sessions in this committee until we have an announcement of what policy the Government purpose pursuing in regard to this very serious and important situation.


Francis Cochrane: I agree with my hin. friend that the railway situation is very serious, and it deserves and will receive the consideration of the Government; but to say that it is the greatest problem before the Government is not true; the war is the greatest problem, and that we will attend to first. The Bill introduced to-day is the most important legislation ever introduced in this country, and until that is disposed of we cannot expect to- deal with much more legislation.


Frank Oliver: Will an opportunity be given, when the minister's estimates are up again, to discuss the information he is to lay on the Table to-morrow?


Francis Cochrane: Oh, yes.


George William Kyte: Wh-at amounts were spent last year for betterments on that section of

the Intercolonial between Point Tupper and Sydney?


Francis Cochrane: I made a note of the hon. gentleman's remarks before dinner and wired to Moncton for the information. As soon as I receive it I shall be glad -to communicate it.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Is the minister proceeding with the construction of a viaduct at Trenton, in the county of Pictou, to avoid the railroad tracks in connection with the steel company?


Francis Cochrane: I think there is an item in the Estimates for that. I will let my hon. friend know later on.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What is the situation with regard -to t'he coal supply for the Intercolonial? Have arrangements been made for the coming year, and contracts been let?


Francis Cochrane: We have bought all the coal we need for the Intercolonial and the eastern part of the Transcontinental, except about 75,000 tons. At the head of the lakes we have about that amount for the Transcontinental in the West.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Where was this coal purchased?


Francis Cochrane: Some from American coal companies, and some front Montreal. We have also two boats carrying coal from Sydney to Levis, to supply that port and points down to Riviere du Loup.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What coal companies are supplying this coal for the Transcontinental and the Intercolonial?


Francis Cochrane: I cannot give that information to-night, but I will get it for my hon. friend.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Has the question of the Acadia Company been settled yet?


Francis Cochrane: For 25,000 tons.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: At what price?


Francis Cochrane: 


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: 25,000 tons have been ordered at $4.25?


Francis Cochrane: Yes.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Has that amount
been accepted?


Francis Cochrane: Yes.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I think the minister tcld me before that the amount at issue was something like 75,000 tons.


Francis Cochrane: No, we have only purchased 25,000 tons from them.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What is the amount of coal purchased from the American companies for the Intercolonial?


Francis Cochrane: I have not the figures, but will get them for my hon. friend.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The minister cannot expect to get his Estimates through unless he supplies us with the usual information; it is not the practice of Parliament.


Francis Cochrane: If the hon. gentleman will tell me what information he wants, I shall be glad to get it for him. It would take a Philadelphia lawyer to carry all this information in one's head.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The minister cannot assume that attitude with me; it may do with some people, but not with me. Every other minister, when his estimates are up, is prepared to give the Committee this ordinary information.


Francis Cochrane: I told my hon. friend I would get the information for him as soon as possible.
. Air. MACDONALD: That means we shall never get it. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, when his estimates were before the House two or three days ago, did not adopt the attitude of my hon. friend, but had his officials here and was ready and anxious to give all the information that was asked for; there was no delay. The minister knows that my questions are reasonable.


The ACTING CHAIRAIAN (Mr. Blain):: Carried.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What do you mean, Sir, by calling Carried in the midst of this discussion?


@Acting Chair(man)? of Committees of the Whole: I have done nothing to call forth such a remark from my hon. friend.
, Air. COCHRANE:	I have told the hon.
gentleman that I am getting the information, and I think almost any other hon. member would have accepted my word. 1 do not make statements that I do not carry out.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I was pointing out that it is the practice with ministers at the head of great spending departments such as this, to come prepared with in* formation on most ordinary questions that are likely to crop up. In regard to the
im
questions asked by myself and by my colleagues, the minister has given us no information at all.


Francis Cochrane: We are not on the
item of coal, anyway.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: There is no item for coal.


Francis Cochrane: It comes under operating expenses, and that is not under discussion now.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I have asked the
minister whether he proposes to construct' the viaduct at Trenton in the county of Pictou, and if so, is it to be done by contract or day labour? I should also like a full statement of what coal he has purchased for the Intercolonial, from whom, and at what price. If the minister says he will give me that information at an early date I have no more to say, except that he should be prepared to furnish the committee with information of this kind when his Estimates are up.


George William Kyte: I was somewhat disappointed at being unable to get the information I asked for with regard to the expenditure for betterments on the Intercolonial. The item before the committee is for construction and betterments on the Canadian Government railways, $6,500,000. It is well known that for the past two or three years the Department of Railways and Canals has been spending a very considerable amount of money on the Intercolonial railway between Point Tupper and Sydney for straightening curves, reducing grades, putting in concrete culverts and approaches. I congratulate the minister on these expenditures, which are very important to that section of the road, but I am bound to say with all deference that I did hope to be able to get the information I asked for this evening. I am not finding fault with the minister, but inasmuch as there is a great deal of information pertaining to this particular item to which the committee is entitled, I should be glad if the minister would allow the item to stand for the present.


William Manley German: I was to inquire further of the minister regarding the report of the Royal Commission on the railway situation. I think the House should have this information at a very learly date. The report of Sir Henry Drayton and Mr. Acworth states that the Grand Trunk Railway Company claim to be, and in the opinion of both these gentlemen are. re-

lieved from legal liability in connection with the operation of the Transcontinental portion of the system under the terms of the agreement. Has the minister had any opinion from the Department of Justice, or, if not, will he secure an opinion from that department,, to inform the House whether or not this company is relieved from legal obligation to operate the portion of the railway built by the Government from Winnipeg to Moncton? For, if they are legally relieved from this obligation, it can only be by reason of the fact that the contract entered into between the Government and the Grand Trunk Company has been violated by the Government; no violation of that contract by the Grand Trunk Railway Company or by the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company, could relieve the Grand Trunk Company from this liability. This House and the country ought to know whether the company has been relieved from its legal obligation. This is an exceedingly serious matter, far too serious to be passed over without full information and thorough investigation.


Francis Cochrane: 
Mr. McKENZIE:: I fully sympathize with what has been brought to the attention of the minister by the hon. member for Welland. This and other large questions will have to be dealt with when the matter comes before the House. But there are some matters of a local character relating to my own constituency, which I desire to call to the attention of the minister. These may appear small matters, but this is the only railway operated in the part of the country from which I come, and the minister is the one representative of the owners of that railway before whom we can bring any difficulties or grievances, and so we must bring to his attention small matters as well as great ones. By correspondence, I have already brought to the notice of the minister the fact that there is a good deal of faultfinding in the county of Cape Breton and the county of Victoria, by reason of the fact that the people are refused proper railway crossings. It was in 1887, I think, that the right-of-way for this railway in the island of Cape Breton was obtained. That is a

good many years ago, and at that time the farming population of Cape Breton, and the products of the farms there were not as important as they are to-day, nor was there such a call for farming as there is at present. In those days, it was quite common to have a farm of two or three hundred acres, and for each farm there would be one crossing. But in many cases it has happened that one or two sons have taken fifty or a hundred acres of the old farm and have started farming on their own account. Yet the Department of Railways, as I understand it, refuses to give more crossings. It is not very much encouragement for a young man to remain on the land and carry on' the agricultural' production that we consider to-day so very necessary to find that he is refused a farm crossing, in fact that may make the difference between the young man starting a farm or not starting it. I have in mind a case where the railway not only cuts a young man's farm in two, tout runs between him and the post road, and so in order to reach the Toad he must go over to his father's farm and get out by way of the old crossing. There should be more sympathy between the railway management and the farmers in these matters. I have understood that the reason crossings were not granted was that the railway officials did not want to establish a precedent. But there should be no feeling of that kind on their part. To accommodate the farmers in these matters means to develop the country. Even if a farm crossing should cost $100-and few of these crossings, I think, would cost more-the expenditure would be a good one and one with which, I am sure, the members of this House would not find fault. I trust that a more generous policy in this matter will ibe adopted by the department and that the officers on the line, the track-masters and superintendents, will not regard the farmer who asks for a crossing as a man who. is trying to make trouble. It is a matter of general complaint against the bon. minister's officers that they are not in sympathy with those in whose way difficulties are placed, or to whom damage is caused by the railway. So long as the Government runs this road it must expect the same kind of trouble that other railways have., It is more difficult to get at a Government-owned railway by means of the courts, and for that very reason it should be made more easy to approach the officials of the department and get matters of this kind settled.
JUNE 11, m7
At our end of the line, at Sydney, North Sydney and Sydney Mines, there is great reason to complain because of the irregularity of the trains.' This irregularity has continued for nine months or a year past. Trains due at nine o'clock in the morning frequently do not arrive until four o'clock in the afternoon, though they oome only from Halifax, a distance of 250 miles. Some say that the irregularity of the trains is due to bad coal, some that it is due to bad engines, while others say that the track is to blame. Wherever the difficulty lies, at least it will be easy for the minister to find out the facts as to the irregularity we complain about, if any record is kept of the time when the trains leave Halifax and when they arrive at Sydney. Several letters have been sent to me and business people, and those who Havel over this road have asked me to bring this matter to the attention of the minister and see if something can be done for a betterment in this regard.
I would like to also mention to the minister that between our town and Sydney we had very poor accommodation last year. We have a local service when there is ice in the harbour. In the summer we have no local service and there is no necessity for it. We have only one local train a day between Florence, Sydney Mines, North Sydney and Sydney. Last year the first train we could get from North Sydney to Sydney was at two o'clock in the afternoon. To do business, or to attend court in Sydney, we must be there at ten in the morning. The minister will tell me that we should get there on the express in the morning and the fast train coming in at night. But the train is often late and you can never tell when it is coming in. If you have any important business in Sydney you have to leave the night before on the evening express so that you may be sure of being there. In other years we had the train leaving at nine in the morning and that took people from Florence, Sydney Mines and North Sydney to Sydney. But this year instead of the nine o'clock train, we have to depend on the incoming express which, nine times out of ten, is late and there is a feeling on the part pf the business people that it cannot be depended upon. I hope that the minister will instruct his officers to have a proper local service next winter because we cannot toe left' to depend upon the service we had last year.


Francis Cochrane: In reference to my
hon. friend's complaint abput crossings, we
have endeavoured to do as other railways do, but as we propose putting the Government railways under the Railway Commission, these matters will be settled by them if they are not being attended to as it is thought they should be by the minister. With reference to the local train, I have made a note of it and we will discuss it with our officers before winter comes and see what can be done.


Mr. LOGGIE:: I am glad to hear the
minister say that the trunk lines of the Government railways are going to 'be put under the Railway Commission. Is it the intention to have provincially chartered branch lines also placed under the Railway Commission? Will the Railway Commission give 'a through Tate on freight arising on a branch line constructed under a provincial charter a number of years ago and connecting with the trunk line?
I would like to call the minister's attention to the condition of the Caraquet railway, an enterprise that is very much retarded because of the lack of equipment and proper roadbed. It is proposed in some cases to increase the rate 50 per cent in order to make up the earnings. Lack of equipment, especially of facilities for dealing with snowstorms during the winter, is one of the difficulties with which the road has to contend. I hope, however, now that the trunk line of the Government railways is to he under the Railway Commission, that it will have some control over the branch lines that are feeders to the trunk line. It is a matter of great importance to the communities that are served by these branch lines that have been constructed under provincial charters. I would ask the minister to make a note of this, and see what can be done at the earliest' opportunity. I would urge the minister, in the public interest, to make an effort to come to some terms with the bondholders of the Caraquet railway, and take over the management of . that piece of road. The road has good earning power but the rails are light, the roadbed is in a bad condition, and during the stormy portion of the season they can do nothing but battle with the storm. Perishable freight is left where it arises, and a great loss occurs to the commercial interests of that part of the country. We talk about production, we are urging production, but how can production be overtaken if there are no facilities for moving the products to the market? This is a portion of the country that has not the

transportation facilities that it requires for the carriage of its products.
I would also like to ask the minister if any progress is being made with regard to the construction of a bridge from Chelmsford to Millertown? The minister said that he would take the matter up with the local Government, and that he hoped that the local Government would make some move in that direction. He intimated that the Railway Department could perhaps 'find1 the iron work of the bridge. It is the imperative duty of the Government to provide communication from the Chelmsford side of the river. The minister took the rails up for 26 miles along that part of the river, the residents of that section have no railway facilities whatever, and they have no means of crossing the river to the railway that is operated on the other side. I believed the minister was in earnest when he told us that arrangements would be made with the local Government with a view to having that bridge constructed. The survey was made, and I have no doubt the report of the survey is in the department. I am not prepared to say that it was finally made, but I know that some location was made in view of the possibility of the bridge being constructed either by the Federal or the Provincial Government. The minister will recall that a few years ago the?e was a contract entered into for the construction of a Y at Derby Junction. For some reason, which I have never been able to understand, the contract was cancelled, and the Y was not constructed. When representatives of my town called upon the manager, he said that if it was found to be unsatisfactory he would endeavour to have [DOT] the Y constructed. The matter has remained in that position. The local train runs from Loggieville to Derby Junction and stops there, and it cannot turn because there is no "Y" there, and it must back into Chatham. I should like to know why the "Y" was not constructed at Derby Junction. I hope the minister will take that into consideration.


Francis Cochrane: It is impossible to bring these branch lines, constructed under provincial charter, under the Railray Board, unless they are declared to be works for' the general advantage of Canada. It would be strong handed work for the Government to place them under the Railway Board. The "Y" cannot be proceeded with, because we cannot get rails.


William Stewart Loggie: That is a good reason.


Francis Cochrane: WTe have taken up a good many branches, in order to procure rails. We have succeeded in placing a contract for 10,000 tons of rails with the Dominion Iron and Steel Company. I think the hon. gentleman is mistaken in reference to that bridge. I do not think I made the promise he refers to. The promise may have been made in my absence by someone else.


William Stewart Loggie: I am glad the hon. gentleman has given the reason why the "Y" was not constructed, and I am pleased to have his promise that when the rails are available it will be constructed.


Francis Cochrane: I did not make the promise.


Mr LOGGIE:: Better make it at once.


Francis Cochrane: I do not make promises


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I do not know
whether the minister gave us the details of the items contained in the $6,500,000 for construction and betterment. If the details have been given, and it appears on Hansard, it will be to .the advantage of the House to know it, but as the- information is not given in detail in the vote, as is generally done, this Committee is not in a position to give the matter full consideration. I think the minister should let the vote on construction and betterment stand till the former Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) is present. He is attending a public function in Brockville, and was not able to come. He asked me to mention this matter in his absence, and ask to have it stand. Perhaps the minister will grant that courtesy. The Committee should have the details before passing the item.


Francis Cochrane: I can give the hon. gentleman the details.
Roadbed and track	$	333,000
Bridges		364,200
Buildings	 571,000
Miscellaneous	$4,158,000


Edward Walter Nesbitt: That would make up more than the amount.
Mr. COCHRANE; No, it only makes $5,042,000. Then the next items:
Prince Edward Island, roadbed and
track	 $ 7,600
Bridges		900
Miscellaneous	 2,200
New Brunswick and Prince Edward
Island Railway,	Buildings	
14,500Roardbsd and	track	
64,000Bridges	
55,600Miscellaneous	
4,COO


Arthur Bliss Copp: What buildings would that be applied to?


Francis Cochrane: I have not the details.
Cape Tourmentine terminal facilities, standard 40,000 gallon tank and
supply	$ 6,000
Four stall frame engine house	 S,y00
Coaling plant and shed	 500
Total	$14,500


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The first one you gave us was roadbed on the Intercolonial Railway. This is capital expenditure. Is it new construction?


Francis Cochrane: Yes.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Where is the money to be expended?


Francis Cochrane: Chaudiere junction
yard extension; to settle land claims, ballasting charges, $15,000; St. Germain extend passing siding, $3,000.
Survey and inspection.
To prepare record plans and profiles,
and spiral and. recenter curves, etc. $ 20,000
Total roadbed and track	 333,000
National Transcontinental Railway
buildings	118,900
Roadbed and track	151,100
Bridges	 74,000
Miscellaneous	 22,700
Winnipeg elevator	   425,000
Lake Superior Branch, G.T.P., buildings	 3,800
Roadbed and track	 15,400
Bridges	 87,700
Miscellaneous	 20,000


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I would like to ascertain from the minister, speaking of what has been hitherto known as the Intercolonial, whether the amount which he rneni-tioned for roadbed covers any new construction in any part of the road, or whether it involves a shortening of the road.


Francis Cochrane: For business and private sidings, there is $43,100; for Chaudiere Junction yard extension, to settle land claims and ballasting, $15,000.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I understood the
hon. gentleman to read an item something like $500,000 for roadbed. Did that include the construction of any new piece of roadway?


Francis Cochrane: The item was $335,000.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What is contained in the item of miscellaneous, $4,000,000?


Francis Cochrane: Halifax, team delivery yard at deep water, $50,000. New Glasgow, paving South street, $6,500. Moncton shops: machinery, $35,000; stores, shop
elevator, $1,200; air compressor, $16,500. Scotia No. 1, 'bridge for life Iboats, $3,500. To provide safety appliances on rolling stock as per requirement of Board of Railway Commissioners of Canada and Interstate Commerce Commission of United States on interchange of equipment, $17,300. Halifax ocean terminals, $3,500,000. Total new work, miscellaneous, $3,630,000, less amount of revote not required for Sunny Brae branch, $477,000 and Levis improvements, $127,000. Total, $3,026,000.


Arthur Bliss Copp: On whose report or advice was the track removed from the main line of railway at the wharf at Saokville?


Francis Cochrane: The track was taken up because we wanted the rails. We do not propose to abandon it; we shall replace it as soon as we can get rails.


Arthur Bliss Copp: In discussing the removal of rails from the Transcontinental the other day, the minister intimated that only a certain kind of rail would serve the purpose for which rails were required on the other side. The piece of track to which I refer is not more than half a mile long. Some years ago a large wharf was built at Sackville at a cost of about $40,000, and, as it was not connected with the main line of railway, it could not be used. Subsequently the Government, at considerable expense, repaired an old wharf to which there was access by rail. For two years, during the construction of the car ferry terminals at Cape Tormentine, it has (been impossible to use the pier at Cape Tormentine for the shipment of lumber and other commodities, and the Sackville wharf has been used for that purpose. Last March the rails connecting with the wharf were taken up, and business men who had 'built warehouses on the wharf and stored in them large quantities of fertilizer and other goods were subjected to great loss and inconvenience. It is unfortunate that the only means of shipping in that section of the country should have been suddenly taken away. I agree that when rails are required we should give as many as we can. But I understood from the discussion the other day that in the case of the removal of rails in other localities, care was taken that there should be uo serious interference with business arrangements and that proper accommodation should be given in some other way. In this case it is not possible to make other satisfactory arrangements under which the business people of the locality affected may use the wharf. I think, therefore, that the minister was ill-

advised in taking up that short piece of track, thereby occasioning great loss to the shippers and to the people generally of that locality.


Mr. BOULAY:: Some six years ago the Department of Railways decided to build two subways at St. Fabien, in the county of Rimouski, one at the east and one at the west end of the station. Although the subway proposed to be built at the east end of the station was the one most necessary, the one at the west was built, while the construction of the other was postponed. The siding at the station completely blocks the public crossing, and people travelling to the village have often been detained in winter from thirty to forty-five minutes being unable to cross the track. These delays occasion great annoyance and inconvenience. I understand that for many years provision had been made in the Estimates for completing the construction of both subways, but up to the present time the one at the east has not been built. I would ask the Minister of Railways to look into this matter and to do the best he can to make this improvement as soon as possible. In view of the nature of the crossings and the need for improved facilities, this subway is one of the most urgently required improvements on the Intercolonial railway. Upon approaching the track, the farmers have to climb a heavy hill. At the top the ground is level for a distance of about twenty-five or thirty feet, and sometimes ten or fifteen teams collect on that small piece of ground. There is a downhill slope on the other side of the track, and the whole crossing is very dangerous. If the minister will examine the plans and reports that have been made on the subject, he will realize the truth of what I am saying and appreciate the benefit that the construction of this improvement would be to the public in that locality.


Francis Cochrane: I shall be very glad to , 'have the matter looked into, and if the situation is as the hon. member says it is, there is no question that there ought to be a crossing at that point, andi we will see what can be done.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: This item in the
Estimates this year is in a peculiar situation. There does not appear to 'be any vote upon income for the Intercolonial, and the only item which relates to the Canadian Government railways is contained in this one on page 52 of the Estimates:
Construction and betterments, Dartmouth to Deans, branch line, and to provide car ferry- construction terminals, etc.

I would gather from what the minister said with regard to construction and betterments that he included a large expenditure for bridges and roadbed on the Prince Edward Island railway. Do I understand that notwithstanding the fact that this is war time, the minister purposes making this very large capital expenditure in Prince Edward Island for the purpose of changing the gauge of the railway?


Francis Cochrane: No.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What then is the
minister intending to do with all this money?


Francis Cochrane: I read out what we
were doing.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: It is on account of
what the minister stated in a general way -so many hundred thousand dollars for roadbed and! so many for bridges-that I asked the question. Those items I would have thought would naturally have come out of income and not be charged to capital unless they involved a change of gauge.


Francis Cochrane: There is only $900 for bridges in Prince Edward Island.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Am I to understand that the changing of the gauge of the Prince Edward Island railway for the purpose of utilising the car ferry is not to be made now ?


Francis Cochrane: Not this year.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I impressed upon
the minister twice this session the necessity of securing an increased quantity of rolling-stock for the purpose of ensuring the transportation of coal. The coal situation in Canada is very serious. By reason of the fact that the vessels engaged in the transportation of coal from Nova Scotia to the St. Lawrence river having been commandeered, and that at the present moment it is problematical whether arrangements can be made for transporting the coal at Nova Scotia ports, the question is very grave as to whether the people of Quebec who depended on Nova Scotia in the past for their coal supplies will be able to obtain any this year. We were absolutely dependent on the Intercolonial railway for the distribution of coal throughout the Maritime Provinces, with the exception of one or two ports. I am advised that conditions in regard to the supply of what are known as coal cars are very bad. A few days ago the minister told me that about a year ago there had been given to a car company in

my constituency an order for some coal cars which order had not been filled. I have made some inquiries into the matter, and I am advised that the order to which the minister refers was given more than a .year ago, and that it had been filled.


Francis Cochrane: I do not think I said coal cars; I was speaking about box cars.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I was directing the minister's attention then, and I am directing it now to the necessity for the reasons I have indicated, of getting some new coal cars on the Intercolonial. I hope the minister is buying cars liberally for this reason: that last year whatever occurred between the Canadian Pacific and the Intercolonial, the Canadian Pacific would not take freight for transport and delivery to the Intercolonial; in fact complaints came from as far as Newfoundland to that effect. The other day I received a telegram from a friend of mine in business in Newfoundland asking me to see whether some means could not be found for the shipment of some goods which he had ordered in the West, and which of necessity had to go over the Intercolonial to North Sydney to reach Newfoundland, because there is no communication by sea from Montreal. On account of the fact of which the minister is well aware and which I am told is true, that there was some difficulty in regard to the interchange of cars, freight conditions in the Maritime Provinces last winter were such that business men were put to the greatest possible inconvenience. The reason given locally by the railway officials was that cars could not be secured. If that be so, and taking into consideration the fact that extra demands were made upon the railway by reason of the shipment of war supplies, that only accentuates the argument in favour of the minister ordering at once a large number of cars. Over a year ago when the Minister of Customs was putting through the Railway Estimates I urged him to place an order for a supply of cars, and I understand that later on an order was given, but it was given very late in the season, I think, in July.


Francis Cochrane: In May.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: We were discussing the matter only about this time last year, and the order was placed after that.


Francis Cochrane: Parliament had prorogued long before this time last year.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Parliament prorogued in the early part of June last year.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: In May.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Well, it was in May, just before prorogation that we were discussing the matter. I understood that what the minister referred to was coal cars and not box cars. I would urge him to take steps to ensure that an ample supply of coal cars be obtained for the Intercolonial, and that a supply of box cars is ordered now so that we shall get them within a reasonable time. If we do not order them now, we shall never get them, because there is no telling when the war will stop. It is imperative that the minister should have these cars.


Francis Cochrane: I must have misunderstood the hon. member or he must have misunderstood me. It was box cars that the Eastern Car Company had not delivered on the order given more than a year ago. They sent in a quotation to-day for a number of box cars which they said they would not deliver before March of next year. Therefore, the hon. member can see how hard it is for us to get cars.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The longer you put the matter off the longer the delay.


Francis Cochrane: We are not putting it off, we have given that company an order for a thousand cars which must be filled before the end of the year; we have given an order for another thousand to the Canada Car Company, and we are asking for tenders for 5,000 more. We have scoured the United States for second-hand coal cars in order to help out the situation in the Maritime Provinces; we have secured some, but not as many as we expected. It is almost impossible to get them.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I wish to bring to the notice of the minister the necessity for some improvements at the end of the Intercolonial in connection with my county. The station in my town is absolutely inadequate for the traffic there. It is a small station-house with only one small compartment for a'l kinds of passengers. The minister knows that it is the place where we land passengers for Newfoundland, and he will find, if there is any record kept, that the number of passengers leaving the train at North Sydney is perhaps as large as in any other place with the exception possibly of the city of Halifax.
There are no conveniences at the North Sydney station at all; the accommodation is altogether inadequate for the traffic, and I trust that some steps will soon be taken to give to North Sydney station accommodation commensurate with its needs. As

one of the public, I am sure I may say to the minister that no person in Canada expects the Government Railways to be [DOT]behind the private companies in providing accommodation at stations where the agent whether man or woman, has to stay at night. There is a railway station at a place called McKinnon's Harbour *Much is not fit for a man to live in. This station is in a magnificent farming centre, but 1 suppose the amount of traffic there is not very large. The agent, however, has to stay there summer and winter, and the accommodation is practically, no better than what you would get if you turned a packing case upside down. I should be glad if the minister would provide this agent with accommodation worthy of the railway and of the country. A little farther along the line there is a place called 'Christmas Island, which is quite a traffic centre. Five or six country merchants get their goods at this station, and I am sure the traffic pays well, but there is no accommodation for the goods left at the station and consequently they have to be left on the side of the road with nobody to look after them. Those are three matters that I wish particularly to bring to the attention of the minister because the need is very great, namely, better accommodation for the traffic at North (Sydney and Christmas Island, and reasonable accommodation for the agent who is obliged to live at McKinnon's Harbour. I hope the minister will look into these matters and provide for the accommodation in his estimates next year.	,


Frank Oliver: When did the Government become possessed of the International Railway, and at what price?


Francis Cochrane: It is a branch line
from Campbellford to Leonard's Junction, 113 miles long, and was purchased three years ago for about 32,700,000.


Frank Oliver: Was the purchase made
before the war?


Francis Cochrane: Yes, we should not
have bought it after the war.


Frank Oliver: I think I read in the newspapers that it was acquired by the Government in January laet.


Francis Cochrane: No, that was a mistake.


William Manley German: Who was the road bought from?
[Mr McKenzie.]


Francis Cochrane: From a man named
Thomas Malcolm, who had some bond company, I think, associated with him.


Frank Oliver: The Government seems to have plenty of money for railroads in every place except the Northwest. Railroads already existing in New Brunswick and railroads partially existent in Quebec are being bought, but the Northwest seems to be getting1 no attention from the Government at all. I heard the minister say a few minutes ago that it would be a very serious matter to declare a certain provincially-chartered branch line in New Brunswick to be for the general advantage of Canada, thereby bringing it under the Railway Commission. The Government has no hesitation in doing that in the province of Alberta, but they do not seem to be taking any measures for the completion of the road. The plea made by the Minister of Finance, when I brought up this matter the other evening, was lack of money, but I notice there is an abundance of money to
buy roads in New Brunswick and Quebec.
\


William Stewart Loggie: Have any steps been
taken to take over the Caraquet railway?


Francis Cochrane: There is not much to take over.


William Stewart Loggie: I think the minister's
answer is tt[e strongest reason why something should be done in the public interest. If the road was operated as it ought to be the country would (be helped. The road does a ^ood business and should be fairly remunerative. I do not suppose, however, that it would pay the interest on the investment necessary, and that is the reason why the present bondholders do not put the road in proper shape to give satisfactory service in stormy weather. The minister says there is not much to take over, but what there is of it should be taken over in the interests of that section of the country.


William Pugsley: I should like to say a word or two on the subject of (branch lines because it brings prominently before the House the question whether public men are to keep faith with the people of the country, or whether no further attention is to be given to their pledged words. In the latter case we have a condition of affairs that is not calculated to retain the respect and confidence of the people. I think there

have been only two branch lines taken over in the lower provinces. The International railway is a very valuable road, occupying a very important strategic position, and if it were owned by a private company a very large traffic would no doubt be taken away from the Intercolonial.
I think the minister was well advised in carrying out what had been approved of by his predecessor. It has also taken over the New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island road. These are the only two. As the minister knows, for years there has been an agitation in this House and throughout the country, in favour of taking over branch lines and operating them as part of the Intercolonial system. As far back as the early fall of 1911, when the general elections campaign was in progress, the hon. member fOT Kings and Albert (Mr. Fowler), who is not at present with us as his duties have taken him overseas, was running in a constituency where an intense interest was taken in this question. The people for years had been demanding better accommodation, especially in the county of Gloucester in regard to the Caraquet railway to which my hon. friend has referred. The hon. member for Kings and Albert was exceedingly desirous to give the people to understand that if the Conservative party were returned to power the branch lines would be taken over and made part of the Intercolonial railway. He wired to the leader of the Opposition of that time, the present Prime Minister (Sir Robert Borden) asking for a telegram clearly defining the policy of the Conservative party on this subject. He received a reply which he deemed entirely satisfactory and which, unfortunately, the people to whom he was appealing also regarded as entirely satisfactory. The words of that telegram from the present Prime Minister I do not recall, but the effect of it was that it had always been the policy of the 'Conservative party to take over the branch lines of the Intercolonial railway. It gave Colonel Fowler clearly to understand that if the Conservatives were honoured with the confidence of the people this policy would be carried into effect. Six years have passed since then, and nothing whatever has yet been done in regard to taking over the railways in that constituency. There are three of them of great importance, the Albert railway, the Elgin and Havelock, and the St. Martins railway. The minister will remember that quite a number of years ago the House unanimously passed a resolution
in favour of taking over the branch lines and making them part of the Intercolonial, and , it has been a great disappointment that nothing whatever has been done in the matter. There are not very many of them and they would be valuable feeders to the Intercolonial, and they would be of infinitely more importance if they were taken over and put into good order so as to operate winter and summer and so that the people could rely upon a continuous and satisfactory service. This ought to appeal to the minister because of the pledged word of the Prime minister which this Government has utterly failed to carry out, greatly to the disappointment of the people. They relied upon the promise, and they are extremely disappointed that it has not been kept. Redress should come from some quarter, though I do not know where it can come from. I feel that if there were a change of government the obligation which this Parliament has taken upon itself in this matter would be fully met. The people despair of getting justice in this matter from this Government, but I think they rely with some confidence upon the pledge if this Parliament being kept, for not only has the Government pledge been given but Parliament also is committed to this policy.
Mr. COCHRANE; I do not know of any time since I became minister when Parliament committed itself to it. Parliament passed a Branch Lines Act, but that does not commit it to the purchasing of all the railways down there. Some of them, as I said once before, instead of being feeders are milkers. There is not any of them but has to be rebuilt, and you could almost build new railways for the same money that it would cost to repair them.


William Pugsley: What does the hon.
minister mean by "milkers"? Does he mean that they are like cows that give good milk? It would seem that the Intercolonial takes the milk out of these branches.


Francis Cochrane: I do not think so. We do not interfere with their rates.


William Pugsley: You take it out of the passengers.


Francis Cochrane: Nothing of the kind. This is not a question to bring up in war time, when our expenditure in the war is a million a day.


William Pugsley: What about the Highways Bill?


Francis Cochrane: The Highways Bill is proposed for good reason. If the war should cease, we have to have a lot of work for our returned soldiers.


An hon. MEMBER:: Breaking stone.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


William Manley German: What about the Quebec and Saguenay which was taken over a long time after the war began?


Francis Cochrane: It was agreed to be purchased before the war.


William Manley German: What about paying the Quebec and Saguenay bond-holders a mil. lion and a half which, it is said, they are not entitled to?


Francis Cochrane: We have not paid them.


William Manley German: You have a Bill to pay them.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I wish to call attention to another matter of the branch lines down home, even if it be war time. It is all very well for the minister to talk about "war time" and say that he cannot build roads now; but he could provide $3,000,000 to spend around the North Pole on what they call the Hudson Bay railway.


Francis Cochrane: Your friend beside you (Mr. Oliver) will defend that.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: That does not change the latitude of this work, nor dpes it change the fact that the minister is spending these millions on it.


Francis Cochrane: Both parties were committed to it before I came in.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: So they were committed to the branch lines. It is no trouble to the minister to go back on the express policy of both parties with regard to the branch lines, but he must go on building the road from Le Pas to Hudson bay. Both parties may have been committed to that project, but, so far as I am concerned, I am not guilty.


Francis Cochrane: The contract was let before I came in.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: That may be, but I am not guilty. There was another agreement made with regard to a road down in my part of the country, which agreement was not lived up to; and I think the time has come when this Government should look into it very seriously and do something to 'make good the loss occasioned to the province of New Brunswick. When these

hon. gentlemen opposite came into power in 1911, they found legislation on the statute book providing for the operation of the so-called Valley railway. Providing it was built under certain terms and conditions, they were to take it over from the province and operate it, paying forty per cent of the gross earnings. - The first thing they did was to change the law in 1912, so that they were able to build the road with seven-degree curves and unfavourable grades. Instead of building the road up to the standard set, they built it much below that standard. There was also legislation under which this road was to be built from a point on the Transcontinental at or near Grand Falls to St. John.
It was to be the outlet for all western transcontinental business coming to the port of St. John. One of the first official acts of this Government was to drop the subsidy on the upper end of the road and make it impossible to make that connection. But, acting on the strength of the promise made by this Parliament before this Government came into power, the Government of New Brunswick of that day entered into the construction of this road and have spent somewhere about $7,000,000-I am not sure as to the exact amount, (but a very large amount. They have got the road built from a very bright little town in my constituency called Centreville, extending southwards and in a few months it will be completed to a point on the Canadian Pacific from which they can get connection with St. John. But it is only a local road, and as a result it has only local traffic. They are only able to run one mixed train one way each day, because that enables them to take care of all the traffic that arises. I submit to the House that the expenditure of this money by the Government of New Brunswick was never justified except upon the theory, and upon the agreement, that it was to become a part of the Transcontinental railway. If this Government had carried out the contract which Parliament had made with the people of New Brunswick, if they had not degraded the road, or allowed their friends in New Brunswick to degrade it, if they had not cancelled the subsidy, if they had built the bridge across the St. John river at Andover and made it possible to get connection with the Transcontinental railway, the province of New Brunswick would have received sufficient from its 40 per cent of the earnings of the road to have fairly paid the interest on the bonds. I find from the Budget speech made in the Legislature of New Brunswick at Frederic-

ton last week that they have figured a deficit of a quarter of a million dollars this coming year in interest over and above their share of the earnings of the road. A quarter of a million dollars is an enormous amount to he taken out of the ordinary revenues of a small province like New Brunswick. It has reached a point when there must be direct taxation upon the people of that province to take care of the interest, all because this Government have not carried out the pledge that was made to the people of New Brunswick by virtue of the legislation which they found in existence when they came into power. It is true that they have taken over the operation of the road on an agreement that practically means that 40 per cent goes to the province. But unless they carry out the trade that was made by Parliament in its spirit as well as in its letter and build that road through to the Transcontinental railway, or assist to carry it through by renewing the subsidy which they cut off, unless they stand by the trade in such a way as to enable it to be made a through line, ft is the duty of the Government to take over the road, take over the bonds, pay them and relieve the province of New Brunswick of the enormous drain that they have upon their public revenue. I do not see, in view of the action of the present Government, anything to do but to assume the payment of these bonds, and, of course, take over the road and run it as a part of the Intercolonial.
I am bringing this matter to the minister's attention in the greatest sincerity. I am pointing out how he and his friends have created the condition that exists today. I am not blaming the minister personally at all but I am blaming his Government and their friends for the very unfortunate condition in which we find ourselves to-night. Unless he will in some way get this road through to the Transcontinental and put it where it will get through business, I see nothing in the world to do but take the road over, assume the bonds and run it as a part of the Intercolonial. I hope the minister will give this very serious consideration and I can assure him that no matter what Government is in power in Canada, or what Government is in power in New Brunswick, this is a question which must be faced. I think this is the first time that it has been brought to the attention of this House but it will come up again because the condition is such that it is simply intolerable, all due to the fact that the Government have not carried out
the pledge made to the province and which has forced upon the province an expenditure of $7,000,000 or $8,000,000.


Francis Cochrane: 
Frank Broadstreet Carvell: You have absolutely repealed the subsidy from Andover.
Mr. COCHRANE- No, it lapsed; it was not repealed.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: It was not renewed.


Francis Cochrane: I know it was not renewed because they have not been able to build the road. We are now living up to our agreement and paying them 40 per cent of the earnings. We have not built the bridge across the river at Andover but


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: You will not carry out your agreement.


Francis Cochrane: It is impracticable to build it.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Then you refuse to carry out the agreement of Parliament.


Francis Cochrane: I know, but there is common sense in all things and there are things that the Government should do and things they should not do. You know as well as I do that there would not be any traffic over that bridge which would cost' I do not know how much-


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: It would not cost more than a quarter of a million dollars.
Mr. COCHRANE. A quarter of a million vour granny; you could not touch that for a quarter of a million.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: My hon'. friend is talking about something that he does not know anything ab.out.


Francis Cochrane: I know the best engineers in the country think that.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: My |hon. friend has
never seen the location of the bridge.


Francis Cochrane: It would not make
any difference if 1 had; I am not giving my own opinion,.
iMr. CARVELL:	The minister is not
speaking on the reports of any engineers.


Francis Cochrane: Yes, I am. The chief engineer of the old Government appoiniea

for the building of the Quebec bridge made a report in which he said that it would cost $3,000,000.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I knew my hon. friend did not know what he was talking about. He is not talking about the bridge I aim talking about.


Francis Cochrane: You are talking about the bridge across the St. John river?
' Mr. CARVELL: Certainly-at Andover. Mr. COCHRANE: Oh, well.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I knew my hon. friend was not listening to me.


Francis Cochrane: It is the bridge across the river to go to St. John that I am talking about.
Mr. 'CARVELL: I am not talking about that at all. The original proposition was to construct three bridges of which one is at St. John and one at Andover. The bridge at Andover would not cost more than a quarter of a million and I think it might not cost more than $200,000. It would be necessary to make connection with the Transcontinental near Grand Falls. It is an altogether different bridge from the one the minister is talking about?


Francis Cochrane: Yes.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I am not finding any fault in regard t;o that matter because the Government are making connections with St. John, although I do not think it was the best arrangement to make. They are making connection by Westfield and using a portion of the tracks of the Canadian Piacific. But I do find fault that in the .other case they have stopped simply in the country and that they have refused to renew the subsidy from Andover to Grand Falls although they renewed the subsidy from Andover South. In spite of the fact that the department agreed to build that road and have the money all voted for building the road across the St. John river at Andover, the minister has refused. That is why I say he has refused to carry out the trade made between this Parliament and the people of New Brunswick. If he will not carry out this trade upon which we have invested $7,000,000 on a line which is not productive, it is the duty of the minister to take over the bonds, pay the interest, take .over the road, operate the line himself and not compel the people of New Brunswick to pay a quarter of a million dollars interest which we would not have been called upon to pay if we had not had 
the promise of this Parliament and if we had n,ot acted upon that promise.


William Pugsley: Mr. Chairman, I am
very glad that my hon. friend from Carle-ton (Mr. Carvell) has called the .attention of the minister to this matter. It is certainly one of very great importance. I aim able to corroborate all that has -been said because I was a member pf the Government which arranged for the original subsidy all the way from Grand Falls to St. John.
Delegations came from New Brunswick, representing the Provincial Government, boards of trade, and other important interests, and the whole idea was based upon connection with the Transcontinental railway at Grand Falls. If it had not been for that, I should not have asked my colleagues nor the people representing New Brunswick, to engage in the enterprise at all. It was only by reason of the road being part of the National Transcontinental railway that the matter could be justified. A subsidy was granted originally on the road from Grand Falls to St. John. The hon. gentleman from Carleton has said very truly that different connection has been made from Gagetown to St. John from that which was originally contemplated. Perhaps that may work out fairly well, but certainly not so well as if the original project had been carried out. It leaves the upper end simply terminating in a prosperous village, but having no connection with the Transcontinental system. The minister is entirely in error when he says the company failed to complete the road, and that the subsidy from Andover to Grand Falls lapsed. The company had the road under construction when this Parliament was asked by the minister to repeal that portion of the subsidy which applied to the section from Andover to Grand1 Falls. There was no failure on the part of the company. The subsidy had not lapsed, and if the minister will refer to the statute he will find a new subsidy from Andover to Grand Falls was substituted for the one from St. John to Grand Falls, and none of us could understand why it was left out. There must have been some Ethiopian in the woodpile, and just what it was I do not know.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: We all protested.


William Pugsley: Yes. And the late Premier Flemming went up to Grand Falls, and told us that it was going to be built, notwithstanding the fact that the minister himself had induced Parliament' to alter the statute by repealing the provision for [DOT] a subsidy from Grand Falls to St. John

and substituting a subsidy from Andover to St. John.


Frank Oliver: I want to place before the committee the position in regard to certain railways in the West, to which I made allusion a few minutes ago. I noticed the minister's remark that a time of war was not a time to consider the building of railways. In the instance I wish to mention, I think I can prove to him that the time of war is the time these roads should be completed, because this is the time when we desire to increase production, and people are settling in these districts depending upon the completion of these railroads for the increase of production.


Francis Cochrane: To what roads do you refer,?


Frank Oliver: Canadian Northern, the line northwesterly from Edmonton and the line northeasterly from Edmonton. Those districts are occupied by a large number of people who have been retarded in the development of their land by reason of the lack of railway communication, but when the road was graded from Edmonton to White Court, in 1913, it was universally taken for granted that the establishment of railway facilities was only a matter of another year. The people who were already in the country were encouraged, and other people went into the country and established themselves there, and the operations of those people have been at a standstill ever since, on account of the road not being completed. The grade is there for over fifty miles from the present terminus, at the crossing of the Pembina river, to White Court, and the grading is going out of repair. It was almost completed ready for the rails, and very expensive work had been done on it. Large cuttings and large trestle works have been put in. The St. Paul de Metis road is directed towards a settlement, some of the settlers in which are 120 miles from the road to-day. Those settlers went into that large tract of country a number of years ago. The district is fertile and attractive. The people are enterprising, but it is impossible for those people to increase their production at such a distance from the railroad. These railroads were chartered originally by the provincial government. They are built under provincial government charter, and aid was given the Canadian Northern Railway Company by provincial government guarantee. The bonds guaranteed by the provincial government
were sold by the railway company to cover one hundred miles on the St. Paul de Metis branch, and about the same on the White Court branch, and construction was begun on the St. Paul de Metis branch, The grade was completed on the White Court branch for a distance of 130 miles from Edmonton. Later on steel was laid on the White Court branch for 70 miles from Edmonton, and no steel was laid for some years on the St. Paul de Metis branch, but recently the grade on the St. Paul de Metis branch was completed for 100 miles, and it is understood 50 miles of steel is now being laid, leaving 50 miles yet to be covered by the steel. When the $45,000,000 guarantee was given to the Canadian Northern, security was taken by this Government on the Canadian Northern western branch lines, and the money raised on the bonds guaranteed by the provincial government appeared in the statement of the assets of the Canadian Northern as security to this Government for the guarantee of $45,000,000. The conditions of the guarantee were that these properties were mortgaged to this Government by second mortgage. The provincial government, which gave the guarantee held a first mortgage on the properties. The second mortgage held by the Dominion Government acted as a bar to the railway company raising any more money, because the money could not be raised in the face of the mortgage to the Dominion Government, and their enterprise has been stalled in that condition ever since, and for that reason this Gov-r eminent, in order to protect its second mortgage, paid the interest on the bond guaranteed by the provincial government and sold by the company. If the interest were not paid, the road would become the property of the provincial government under their first mortgage. In that way, the Dominion Government becomes responsible for the construction of these roads, and still the roads are not completed and have no earning power. I have brought the matter to the attention of the House during previous sessions, and have urged that, under the circumstances, the Government having made itself responsible for the interest on the bonds, they should complete the railway so that it may be able to earn the bond interest. If these roads were completed to White Court in one case, and 100 miles toward St. Paul de Metis in the other case, it would add enormously to the productiveness of that part of the country, in which population is already established,

but is unable to increase its production because of lack of railway facilities. Money employed to secure the completion of these railroads would not be money diverted from the purpose of winning the war; it would rather be money well spent for the purpose of increasiing the production that is necessary to win the war. My hon. friend's Government has money with which to buy and to bonus railroads in other parts of Canada. If it was necessary to put up money to the extent of the ordinary aid given to a railway company in order to complete these roads, no precedent would be broken. It would be doing no more for the people in the part of t'he country affected than is done for people in every other part of the country. I urge upon the minister the desirability of the Government's taking steps to put these railroads in a position to earn interest on their bonds and to secure largely increased production at the hands of people who are settled along those lines and who are discouraged by the disappointment that they have suffered through the non-completion of the roads, the construction of which was their inducement to occupy the lands.


Mr. SUTHERLAND:: We have heard a good deal to-night about what the Government are doing in other provinces; about their building and bonusing railways in other parts of Canada. That phrase " other parts of Canada " has been referred to so often that I do not think that it should pass unchallenged. Only a few years ago hon. gentlemen who are now advocating the Government's doing something for their respective provinces strenuously objected to the payment of the usual subsidy to a railroad in Ontario which the Provincial Government itself undertook to build and pay for. The members for Edmonton and St. John were members of that Government. Year after year the Provincial Government made application for the subsidy. We remember the strenuous opposition that was made when this Government took steps in the matter; how the Bill was finally passed and then rejected by the Senate; how it was passed again the next year and approved by the Senate by only a narrow majority. I do not like to hear so much about " other parts of Canada."


William Pugsley: I think that the province of Ontario applied for the Dominion subsidy after the road was built. The road was undef construction long before application for subsidy was made to this Government.


Donald Sutherland: I am quite positive that time and again application was made to the Government in power at that time for the subsidy, and that it was as often refused.


William Pugsley: Does my hon. friend say that application was made by the Ross Government?


Donald Sutherland: Yes.


William Pugsley: I do not think so.


Donald Sutherland: The late Hon. Sir George Ross himself is on record to that effect. The member for St. John says that the Government ought to take over and operate certain roads in the eastern provinces. We all remember the position taken by hon. gentlemen opposite last year when the province of Ontario objected to the renewing of a charter to an outside company, in view of the fact that the province itself was willing to build without asking this Government for a dollar. Yet hon. gentlemen in this committee and elsewhere strenuously opposed the attitude of the Ontario Government. The Government desire to be consistent; they desire to deal with all provinces alike. They cannot single out New Brunswick and extend to that province concessions which are not extended to other provinces. I think the time has passed when arguments of that nature should be made in the House.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: What does the hon.
gentleman say about the Quebec and Saguenay railway?


Donald Sutherland: Year after year, discussing the branch lines in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, hon. gentlemen told us the same story. In the case to which I refer, they were opposed to the granting of the usual Government subsidy of $6,400 a mile, although the Ontario Government were themselves building the road. No . company would build it, because of the view that the undertaking would not be profitable. That shows the difference in the conditions existing in the several provinces


William Pugsley: I would suggest that we let this item stand-the late Minister of Railways is absent; he would, perhaps, like to speak on this item-and pass items 104, 105, and 106. The minister has made good progress in the way of getting the ideas of the members-which is almost as good as getting votes through, because discussion must take place.


Francis Cochrane: I accept my hon.
friend's suggestion.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The member for Richmond might later desire to say something on item 106. There will be no objection to that?


Francis Cochrane: No.
Progress reported.
On motion of Hon. Mr. Reid the House adjourned at 11.15 p.m.
Tuesday, June 12, 1917.