1918-03-25

[Stage Direction]
Agricultural Department, 1917, Report of' Agricultural Instruction Act and report of the Experimental Farms.-Hon. Mr. Crerar.
Annual Report of the Board of Railway Commissioners and Report of Telephone Statistics for the year ended June 30th, 1917. -Hon. Mr. Reid.


[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Rt. Hon. Sir ROBERT BORDEN (Prime Minister):: I mentioned on Friday that I had sent a telegram to Sir Edward Kemp asking that we might be advised of the conditions wihich have developed in the German offensive, and I have a telegram from him this morning saying that the Canadians are not yet involved, and that he will keep us informed. The Minister of Militia and Defence (Major General Mewburn) has placed in my hands the latest official report which has been received and which reads:
Monday Morning Service.
Bulletin:
London, Mar. 26.-Fresh attacks by the Germans have developed northward and southward of Bapaume, the War Office announces. The British repulsed powerful attacks yesterday afternoon northward of Bapaume.
Bulletin:
Paris, Mar. 25.-The French on Saturday went to the assistance of the British and took over a sector of the battlefront, the War Office announces.
In the region of Noyon on the right bank of the Oise heavy fighting with the Germans is in progress.
Bulletin :
Paris, Mar. 25.- (Official)-The statement follows:
"French troops began to intervene on March 23 in the battle now being fought on the British front. They relieved certain of the allied forces and took up fighting themselves on this sector of the front.
"At the present time they are engaged in heavy fighting in the region of Noyon and they are disputing the heights of the right banks of the Oise with important German forces. ,
"Northwest of Rheims there has been a violent artillery action in the region of Courcy and Loivre. In the Champagne two German surprise attacks east of Suippe resulted in failure. French patrols took some prisoners near Tahure.
"There was much artillery activity between Arracourt and the Vosges. At daybreak German forces attacked the French lines east of Bleneroy and east of BadOnvillers. The Germans were repulsed with heavy losses."

London', Mar. 25.- (Official)-The statement follows:
"The battle continues with great violence on the whole front. Powerful attacks delivered by the enemy yesterday afternoon and evening north of Bapaume were heavily repulsed. Only at one point did the German infantry reach our trenches, whence they were immediately thrown out. Elsewhere the enemy's attacks were stopped by rifle, machine gun and artillery fire in front of our positions, and his troops were driven back with great losses.
"During the night and' this morning fresh hostile attacks have again developed in this neighborhood and also to the south of Bapaume.
"South of PeTOnne, bodies of German troops who had crossed the river between Lioourt and Brie were driven back to the east bank by our counter-attacks."
So far as one can judge, the Germans are undoubtedly throwing absolutely their full force into this attack. It seems to have been met with as great success as was anticipated from the first. It is beyond question that very much depends upon tihe issue; and I know the hearts of the people of the whole country will he lifted up in intercession that the right may prevail.


Sir SAM HUGHES:: Intercession is very proper, but with the view, in a slight degree possibly of helping on the oause, I desire to ask the Prime Minister the following questions. Possibly he might be in a position to answer them to-day, but it will do no harm to ask them in connection with this matter. My questions are:
1.	Inasmuch as Canadians are engaged in the titanic struggle now going on for the preservation' of human liberty, is the Government taking necessary steps to maintain to the highest degree the pride, the courage, the resolution, the 'steadfastness and the confidence of the splendid and gallant soldiers of Canada, as well as of the Empire at large, in this struggle?
2.	Have the Government taken precautions in the management of the forces, the appointment and, the promotion of officers therein and the granting of honours, awards and decorations thereto, that favour from female, society, creed or other undue .influences, shall not prevail; but that all shall be awarded on the one basis of merit and fitness alone?


Mr. SPEAKER:: I think the hon. gentleman's preliminary remark would alone be ample evidence that these questions are not of sufficient urgency to permit them being asked on the Orders of the Day, and that they should be placed on the Order Paper in the ordinary course.


Samuel Hughes: But my next two questions may be of sufficient importance.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Inasmuch as the replies cannot be obtained to-day, and it is desirable to adhere to the proper procedure, 1 would ask the hon. gentleman to adopt the ordinary course.
Sir SAM .HUGHES: The other two questions are of great importance. They read:
3.	Does the Government purpose doing anything to prevent panicky and sensational despatches, which merely cause nervous excitement .among soldiers and population-in Canada and overseas, from being issued by a few mentally epileptic newspaper reporters from overseas?
4.	Has the Government any explanation of why the Allied forces, splendidly armed: and equipped, and in chosen positions of their own, made up of the best men in the world, and numbering from seven to ten men per yard of front, recently gave way before an enemy not their equal in manhood nor superior in armament, even though they numbered thirty men to a yard of front in attack?
I think some action should at once be taken to prevent these panicky and sensational despatches.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I think these questions might much more properly be asked in the ordinary way. . Hon. members would assist much in the proper conduct of the proceedings if they would use sparingly the privilege of asking questions on the Orders of the Day.


Samuel Hughes: I do not want to intrude in the slightest degree on your duties in this House, Mr. Speaker, but I think this is an occasion when nothing should intervene in the way of having the proper appreciation of these things placed before the country.



QUESTIONS.

[Stage Direction]
(Questions marked with asterisks are answered orally.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. POWER.:
1.	How many men have been employed up to March 15th in the registrar's office at Quebec under the Military Service Act?
2.	How many public representatives have appeared before the Courts of Appeal in the district of Quebec?
3.	How much money have they been paid?
Hon. Mr. DOHERTY:: 1.	43.
2.	20.
3.	No payments have yet been made to these representatives.


Mr. POWER:: 1.	How many men have been employed by the Dominion Police in the Military District No. 5 of Quebec, to investigate and round up delinquents under the Military Service Act?
'2. How many of these employees are returned soldiers?


Hon. Mr. DOHERTY:: .
1.	46 men (including inspector).
2.	Eight are returned soldiers-ENLISTMENTS FOR OVERSEAS SERVICE.


Mr. DEMERS:: 1.	What is the number of those who have voluntarily enlisted for service overseas from the start of the war to date?
2.	What is the number of volunteers who have enlisted for service overseas from the first of January, 1917, to the first day of September, 1917?
3.	What is the total number of recruits who have enlisted to date?
Major-General MEWBURN:
1.	448,062.
2.	47,727.
3.	472,728.


NET FISHING IN MISSISQUOI BAY.
Mr. DEMERS:: 1.	What reasons have been adduced for the enactment of the Order in Council dated the 18th February, 1918, prohibiting net fishing in the Bay of Missisquoi and in the Canadian part of Lake Champlain?
2.	Has such prohibition been ordered on account of representations made by the American Authorities?


Hon. Mr. BALLANTYNE:: 1.	That net fishing is not permitted in lake Champlain, and that the beneficial effects of such protection to the fisheries there was being seriously nullified by allowing seine fishing in Missisquoi bay, which is one of the most important spawning grounds of the lake.
2.	The prohibition was adopted following representations by the Canadian section of the International Joint Commission appointed to consider the settlement of outstanding fishery questions between Canada and the United States.


MR. J. A. DUPUIS.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. J. E, MARCILE:
1.	Is Mr. J. A. Dupuis, barrister, still employed at Postal Station B, Montreal?
2.	If so, is he attending regularly to work every day?
3.	Was he granted leave of absence last fall?
4.	If so, at what date did such leave begin and when did it take an end?
5.	Is he still under leave of absence? [DOT]
Hon. Mr. DOHERTY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes.
J.	Yes, on account of illness.
4.	November 30, 1917, to February 2, 1918. Absence from November 30, 1917, to January 2, 1918, was with pay. Absence from January 3 to January 23 was charged to annual leave, and absence from January 24 to February 2 was without pay.
5.	No.
* Mr. J. E. MARCILE:
1.	Is Mr. J. A. Dupuis, barrister, acting as representative of the. Department of Militia in the Court at St. Hyaointhe?
2.	Is he the same Mr. Dupuis, barrister, who is an employee of Postal Station B, at Montreal?
3.	If so, does he get a salary, -and how much per day, as representative of the Department of Militia?


Robert Laird Borden: The answer given to me by the Department of Militia and Defence is:
1.	No.
2.	No information. .
3.	Answered by No. 1.


CANADIAN NORTHERN RAILWAY DIRECTORS.
Mr. VERVILLE:: 1.	What are the names of the persons constituting the present Board of Directors of the Canadian Northern Railway?
2.	What changes have taken place in said board since the month of August, 1917?
3.	What is the name or names and residence of the person or persons directing the operations of said railway?


Hon. Mr. REID:: 1.	Sir William Mackenzie, Sir Donafd Mann, Mr. Z. A. Lash, K.C., LL.D., Mr. D. B. Hanna, Mr. R. J. Mackenzie, Mr. W.
J.	Christie, Mt. W. K. 'George, Mr. E. R. Wood, Mr. R. M. Home-Payne, Major Graham A. Bell, C.M.G.
2.	Hon. Frederick Nicholls and Hon. R. W. Richardson resigned since August, 1917, and Major Graham A. Bell, C.M.G., Ottawa, Out., has been appointed a director since August, 19, 1917.
3.	The general officers are as follows: Sir William Mackenzie, president, Toronto, Ont.; Sir Donald Mann, vice-president, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. D. B. Hanna, third vicepresident, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. Z. A. Lash,
K.	C., LL.D., senior counsel, Toronto, Ont.; Hon. F. H. Phippen, K.C., general counsel, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. M. H. MacLeod,- general manager, Western Lines, Winnipeg, Man.; Mr. S. J. Hungerford, general manager, Eastern Lines, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. W.
H.	Moore, secretary, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. Gerard Ruel, chief solicitor, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. Geo. H. Shaw, general traffic manager, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. L. W. Mitchell, treasurer, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. Lewisi Lukes, asst, to president, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. A. J. Mitchell, asst, to vice-president, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. R.

C. Vaughan, asst, to third vice-president, Toronto, -Ont.; Mr. A. J. Hills, asst. to executive, Toronto, Out.; iM.r. R. P. Ormsby, asst, to secretary, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. C. E. Friend, general auditor, Winnipeg, Man.; Mr. J. D. Morton, aest. comptroller, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. J. R. Cameron, aset. general manager, Winnipeg, Man.; Mr. D. R. Campbell, asst, general manager, Vancouver, B.
C.	; Mr. A. E. Warren, aest. to general manager, Winnipeg, Man.; Mr. A. E. Wilcox, general superintendent, Winnipeg, Man.; Mr. W. A. Browne, general superintendent, Edmonton, Alta.; Mr. W. A. Kingsland, general superintendent, Montreal, Que.; Mr. D.	Crombie, general superintendent, Toronto, Ont.; Mr. J. Bain, general superintendent, Halifax, N.S.; Mr. E. F. Seixas, general electric lines, etc., St. Catharines, Ont.
London, England, offices, Orient House, New Broad street, London, E.C. ; Mr. R. M. Horne-Payne, director representing the company in Europe; Mr. H. W, Harding, local secretary.


BOARD OF PENSION COMMISSIONERS.
Mr. SUTHERLAND:: 1.	What time have each of the Pension Commissioners given to the work of the Board during the year 1917?
2.	How many officials are at present employed on the clerical and administrative staff of the Commission ?
3.	What is the total cost per annum in salaries for Commission and Staff?
4.	How many complaints have been received by the Commission on behalf of members of the Canadian Forces or their dependents against amounts for disability allowed by the Board during the year 1917?
5.	Is there any appeal from the decision of the Board regarding percentage of disability allowed?
6.	Is it the intention of the Government to place the Commission under the control of the Minister of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment?


Mr. HUGH CLARK (Parliamentary Secretary) :: 
CUSTOMS, THE PAS AND DAUPHIN.
Mr. CRUISE:: 
Mr. CANNON:: 1.	Is Mr. Noel Chass6 employed by the Government?
2.	If so, what is the position occupied by him, and what salary does he receive?


Hon. Mr. SIFTON:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Private secretary to the Minister of Inland Revenue; $2,700.
Mr. ALLEYN TASCHEREAU.


Mr. CANNON:: 1.	Is Mr. Alleyn Tachereau, a Quebec barrister, occupying a position under the Government control, in and for the District of Quebec, in connection with the operation of the Military Service Act?
2.	If so, what is said position, the salary thereto attached, and on whose recommendation was the appointment made?


Hon. Mr. DOHERTY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Chief public representative. Six hundred dollars covering from the 1st February to the 1st April, when Mr. Taschereau has notified the Department of Justice, Military Service Branch, that he proposes to resign the office. Upon the recommendation of the Military Service Council.


RELEASE OF MEN UNDER ORDER IN COUNCIL.
Mr. KAY:: How many men have been released temporarily, and how many permanently, by the Minister of Militia under authority of Order in Council No. 3348, (a) prior to the 17th day of December, 1917, and (b) from December 18, 1917, to March 1, 1918, respectively?
Major-General MEWBURN:
(a)	None.
(b)	None.


MILITARY EXEMPTION TRIBUNALS.
Mr. KAY:: 1.	How many representatives were appointed by the Minister of Agricu'ture under Order in Council No. 3349?
2.	What was the number in each of the provinces ?
3.	How many men have (been released from military service to work as agriculturists through the efforts of these representatives?
4.	Are any of these representatives attending the tribunals at the present time?


Hon. Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	116.
2.	Province of Ontario, 87; province of Saskatchewan, 29.
3.	As the representatives did not report in detail the department is unable to give this information.
4.	No.


MILITARY SERVICE.
Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Is the Government aware as to whether or not certain young men of military age residing in the District of Toronto inflicted wounds upon themselves to avoid military service, as reported in the Montreal Daily Star of February 28, 1918?
2.	If so, has any action been taken to punish
the said men?	-
3.	If not, will the report be investigated? [DOT]


Hon. Mr. DOHERTY:: 1.	No-
2.	No.
3.	If definite facts are given, same will be investigated.


CONVICTION OF BRAULT AND SWAN.
Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Was a man named Brault recently sentenced at Montreal to one year's imprisonment for having made public speeches in violation of the terms of the Military Service Act, 1917?
2.	Was a man named Swan recently sentenced at Toronto for the same terms for the same offence?
3.	If so, are both men still serving the said sentence?
4.	If not, 'have either or both of them been granted reprieve by the Minister of Justice?
5.	Were both offenders treated alike?	[DOT]
6.	If not, Why?


Hon. Mr. DOHERTY:: 1.	No; Brault was sentenced at Toronto, his offence being that he persuaded persons to resist enforcement of the Military Service Act. He was not accused of "having made public speeches."
2.	Yes; this man also was not accused of "having made public speeches."
3.	No.
*4. Swan has been released as a matter of clemency; and an application for clemency for Brault is at present under consideration.

5.	The cases of both offenders were dealt with on exactly the same principles. The facts and circumstances bearing on the gravity of the offences and the exercise of clemency in the two cases were very materially different.
6.	Answered by No. 5-


PAY OP MEDICAL EXAMINERS.
[Stage Direction]
'Mr. CASGRAIN:
1.	Was an Order in Council passed in May, 1917, or at any time since, increasing the pay of the Medical Examiners under the Military Service Act?
2.	If so, how much did they receive before the passing of the said Order in Council?
3.	How much do said Medical Examiners receive at the present time?
4.	Is the same rate paid to the said Examiners in all the provinces or in all Military Districts? ,
5.	If not, what is the rate in each province or Military District?
Major General MEWBURN:: 1.	No Order in Council was passed authorizing an increase in the pay of Military Medical Examiners in May, 1917, nor since.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Military Medical Officers receive the pay and allowances of their rank. Civilian Medical Practitioners employed at mobilization centres under Military Service Act receive pay at: $5 per day of 6 hours to 8 hours; $8 per day of 8 hours or more. If away from their homes on duty, they receive $8 per day irrespective of whether they work 8 hours or not.
4.	Yes.
5.	Answered by No. 4.


RETURN OF SOLDIERS TO CANADA.
Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Has any announcement been made hy the Military Authorities that from fifteen to twenty-five thousand soldiers would be brought back from Europe to Canada before the month of June?
2.	If so, how many of the soldiers to be so returned have been wounded?
3.	How many of the said soldiers are unfit for military service?
4.	How	many	Canadian	soldiers	are	in
Prance at the present time?
5.	How many Canadian soldiers are in England at the present time?
6.	How	many	Canadian	officers	are	in
Prance at present?
7.	How many Canadian officers are in England at present?
Major General MEWBURN.
1.	No.
2.	Not available.
3.	Not available.
4.	5, 6 and 7. It is not in the public interest to give this information.


STEAMER CHAMPLAIN.
Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Was the service of the steamer Champlain between Riviere Ouelle and Murray Bay in the Province of Quebec, discontinued on or about the 19th of November, 1917?
2.	Was the said service resumed on or after the 17th of December, 1917?
3.	If so1, why was it discontinued, and why was it resumed?


Hon. Mr. BALRANTYNE:: 1, 2 and 3. The C.G.S. Champlain was withdrawn for repairs on the 19th November and returned on the 23rd December, 1917. The vessel was replaced hy the C.G.S. Bellechasse from the 19th to the 27th November, 1917.


WORK ON THE ST. CHARLES RIVER.
Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Has work upon the St. Charles River at Quebec been suspended?
2.	If so, why?
3.	How much has the said work cost to date?
4.	If the work has been suspended, will it be resumed at a later date?
5.	Have precautions been taken to protect and conserve the work so far completed?


Hon. Mr. GARVELL:: 1.	Yes.
2.	In view of present conditions, it was not>
considered absolutely necessary that work should proceed.
3.	$1,266.93.
4.	The resumption of this work will naturally have to be a matter for future consideration.
5.	The Chief Engineer is now investigating with a view to determining just what is required.


DRY DOCK AT LAUZON, QUEBEC.
Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	When will the dry dock at Lauzon, near Quebec, he completed?
2.	What is the total cost of said dry dock to date?


Hon. Mr. CARVELR:: -
1.	It is expected that the dock will be completed about August 1st next.
2.	$3,077,460.28.


CHARLES DESJARDINS.
Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Was Charles Desjardins, alias Ti-Noir, who is now being tried at Montreal before the Court of King's Bench, ever employed hy the Government?
2l If so, in what capacity, and at what salary?
3.	Did the Department of Justice, or any of its officers, attempt at any time to secure a change in the amount and conditions of bail fixed1 by His Lordship Mr. Justice Pelletier in the above matter?

4.	DM the Department of Justice, or any of its officers, deposit or advance the whole or any part of the amount required to secure the provisional liberty under bonds of the said Charles Desjardins?


Charles Joseph Doherty: 1 and 2. Charles Desjardins was employed by the Dominion Police in the capacity of private detective at $2.50 per day. Not aware that he has the alias of Ti-Noir.
3.	Yes.
4.	The department deposited $10,000 in lieu of bail for Desjardins pending his trial.


QUEBEC POST OFFICE.
Mr. CANNON:: 1.	Has the construction- work on the Quebec post office been finished?
2.	If so, since when?
3.	What amount has been expended on this work?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: 1 and 2. Construction work is almost completed, some little work is still required such as polishing floors, completing stairways and removing debris about premises inside and out.
3.	$500,100.95.


EXPORTATION OF COEDWOOD. '
Mr. MICHAUD:: How many cords of wood have been shipped or exported, from Canada to the United States during the year 1917?


Hon. Mr. SIFTON:: Firewood exported to United States during the calendar year 1917 amounted to 14,689 cords.


RECORD BRANCH OF MILITIA DEPARTMENT.
Mr. FRIPP:: 1.	How many ladies are employed in the Record Branch of the Militia Department?
2.	How many were summarily dismissed on or about the 19th instant?
3.	How many of those dismissed have fathers or brothers overseas?
4.	(a) How many of .those dismissed had no near relatives in the Canadian Expeditionary Forces overseas ; (b) and1 how many of this class were retained ?
5.	Does the Order in Council, giving preference to returned soldiers to appointments in the Government, not apply equally to their dependents?
6.	If so, why were some of such dependents dismissed?
Major-General MEWBURN:
1.	586.
2.	211-but they were not summarily dismissed; they were given eight days leave of absence, with pay, when their services were no longer required.
3.	98.
4 (a). 113.
(b). 267.
5 and 6. No employees of this office were dismissed unless or until they:	(i) were
reported on as unsuitable by their section head; (id) had appeared -before the staff revision board and been- classified as other than " good " or " v-ery goo-d." Consistent with efficiency, those employees with relatives serving overseas are looked! upon as entitled to .preference. In the absence of qualifications- to render them suitable, for employment, preference would not seem to arise, and the matter -is solely one of compassionate grounds.


EXCISE OFFICERS AT BERTHIERVILLE, QUE.
Mr. GERVAIS:: 
POSTMASTERS-DORCHESTER COUNTY.
Mr. CANNON:: 1.	Who are the Postmasters in the County ol Dorchester?
2.	Where are their post offices located?
3.	WThen were they established?
4.	What salaries do these postmasters annually receive?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Abenakis, Ste. Claire, Treffle Lafiamme, 1 July, 1883, $5-0; Anvers Cranbourne, Romeo Bolduc, 24 January, 1917, $50; Asselin, Cranbourne, Maurice Brun, 15 November, 1916, $50; Barnard, St. Malchie, Amedee Girard, 1 June, 1916, $50; Barre, Langevin, Rev. J. Z. Raymond, 1 December. 1916, $50; Cadrin, Joliette, Atha-nase Royer, 1 February, 1913, $50; Chemir. Neuf, Cranbourne. Jos. Bouffard, 1 July, 1913,



$50; Coulombe, St. Isidore, Napoleon Lebreux. 1 January, 1899, $55; Cranbourne, Cranbournie, Patrick Colgan, 1 April, 1854, $50; Culdaff, Cranbourne, John O'Brien, 1 June, 1876, $66 ; Dijon, Standon, Rev. J. V. Rochette, 11 September, 1917, $50 ; Drouin, Standon, Chas. Cor-riveau, 25 January, 1917, $50; Feuille d'Erable, Cranbourne, Odilon Lessard, 18 June, 1912, $114; Fir Grove, Frampton, Napoleon Roy, 1 December, 1900, $54 ; Frampton, West Frampton, Dr. F. E. Boutin, Prior to 1848, $384.27 ; Garroz, Watford, Xavier Poulin, 1 December, 1914, $50 ;Genest, St. Bernard, Nap. Nadeau, 1 September, 1913, $50; Grand Rang, Cranbourne, Philias Baflamme, 1 April, 1894, $54 ; Guindon, Watford, Mrs. P. Rancourt, 1 November, 1913, $50; Hemison, East Frampton, E. Gregoire, 1 August, 1907, J50 ; Hennepin, Standon, Jos. Cor-riveau, 1 May, 1911, $50; Kirouac, Eangevin, Mrs. Claudia Hebert, 1 October, 1913, $55; Lacasse, Frampton, Placide Brosseau, 1 January, 1913, $50 ; Lake Etchemin, Ware, J. L. F. Chabot, 1 March, 1896, $392.59; La Merisi ere, Watford, Gualbert Desroches, 1 January, 1916, $50*; Langevin, Langevin, Misael Languay, 1 March, 1867, $4715.11; Lavery, Metgermette Nord, E. LeBel, 7 June, 1915, $50 ; Morrisset Station, Watford, P. Veuilleux; 1 July, 1910, $106; Mount Kinsella, Frampton, Jose. Humphrey, 1 November, 1912, $50 ; Mount Robson, St. Edward de Frampton, C. Hince, 1 December, 1899, $50; O'Farrell, Frampton, Frank Pare, l December, 1904,	$60; Poliquin, Watford,
Dorilla Dallaire, 1 October, 1913, $60 ; Poulin, Frampton, Philemon Roy, 1 September, 1913, $50; Quatre Chemin, Watford, Nap. Langelier, 1 August, 1903, $69 ; Rainville, Ware, Louis Jacques, 1 April, 1915, $50 ; Ravignan, Langevin, Thomas Bedard, 1 September, 1894, $55; Riviere Metgermette Nord, Metgermette Nord, kreh. Lamontagne, 1 February, 1914,	$54:
Riviere Raquette, Watford, Alph. Poliquin, 1 March, 1911, $123.15 ; Ruisseau a I'Eau Chaud, Frampton. Simon Fortin. 1 February, 1887, $75 ; St. Abdon, Ware, Octave Roy, 1 September, 1904, $54 ; St. Anselme, St. Anselme, E. Fil-teau, 6 January, 1849, $500.11 ; St. Anselme Station, St. Anselme, Ludger Audet, 1 November, 1893, $286.61; Ste. Aurelie, Metgermette, Jean Oiguere, 1 August, 1884, $68 ; St. Benjamin, Cranbourne, Miss C. Veilleux, 1 September, 1895, $146 ; St. Bernard de Dorchester, St. Bernard, Mrs. C. A. Genest, 6 February, 1853, $267.61; Ste. Claire, Ste. Claire, Miss E. Cayouette, 6 January, 1849, $453.92: Ste. Edouard de Frampton, Frampton, Jean G. Le-Houillier, 1 March, 1868, $50; Ste. Germaine Station, Ware, Achille Lacasse, 1 March, 1907, $209.80 ; Ste. Henedine, Ste. Henedine, Alf. Fournier, 1 April1, 1854, $410.13; St. Isidore Dorchester, St. Isidore, Jean Turgeon, 6 April, i852, $279.92 ; St. Malachie, East Frampton, Miss L. Turgeon, 1 October, 1864, $345.66; St. Malachie Station, Frampton, J. Lacasse, 1 January, 1912, $255; Ste. Marguerite de Dorchester, Ste. Marguerite, J. B. Gagnon, 6 April, 1852, $253.70; St. Nazaire de Buckland, Buck-land, Gaudias Bechard, 1 April, 1894, $67; St. Odilon, Cranbourne, Mrs. Jos. Boivin, 1 April, 1883, $249.21; St. Prosper de Dorchester, Watford, Hector Samson, 1 June, 1882, $436.78 ; Ste. Rose de Watford, Watford, Ephraim Bougie, 1 July, 1882, $166 ; St. Zacharie, Metgermette, Hormisdas Poulin, 1 June, 1882, $366.25; Sevi-gny, Langevin, J. E. Audet, 1 February, 1912, $50 ; Springbrook. Frampton, John Bartholomew, 1 August, 1875, $60; Standon, Standon, Elzear Soucy, 1 February, 1855, $259.22 ; Vachon, Met-
germette Nord, Achille Vachon, 1 April, 1914, $50.


INLAND REVENUE EMPLOYEES.
Mr. CANNON:: 1.	What are the names and addresses of the employees of the Department of Inland Revenue who have been appointed since June 1, 1917?
2.	What is the nature of their employment?
3.	What is the amount of their salaries?
4.	On what dates were they appointed?


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: 
Mr. CASGRAIN:: 
Sir WILFRID LAURIER :: For a copy of all memoranda and petitions by Slav subjects of Austria, naturalized in Canada, setting forth grievances and suggesting remedies.


Wilfrid Laurier: For a copy of all petitions, letters or communications of any kind either asking for or opposing the importation of coolie labour, from the first of September last to date.


Air. LEAIIEUX:: For a return showing the total money value of the hard coal, soft coal, oil and gasolene imported into Canada during the years ending March 31, 1914, 1915, 1916, and 1917, and for each month since March, 1917.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS.

Air. PREVOST:: 1.	What is the total amount of war contracts fulfilled in the Province of Quebec, from August, 1914, to January, 1918?
2.	How many war munitions establishments are in activity in the Province of Quebec?
3.	How many shells are manufactured weekly in said province?
4.	How many hands are engaged in such establishments in said province?


Mr. CANNON:: 1.	Who are the contractors for the transportation of His Majesty's Mails in the County of Dorchester?
2.	What sums do they receive annually for this work?
3.	When were the contracts in each case given, and upon whose recommendation?
4.	When does each of these contracts terminate?


Mr. POWER:: 1.	How many officers who were engaged in active service overseas have returned to Canada-during the year 1917?
2.	What was the reason for their return?
3.	What was the rank of such officers?
4.	To what battalion were they attached overseas and in what capacity?
5.	What are their respective occupations and the amount of salary paid to them since their return?
6.	How many were returned because they refused to revert to a lower rank in order to go to the front?


Mr. VERVILLE:: 1.	What number of Chinese entered into Canada during the months of September, October, November December, 1917, and January and February, *1918?
2.	How many have remained in Canada during the same period?
3.	How many of them have gone to work In mining districts?
4.	How many of them have gone to work as agriculturists?
8}
5.	Under what conditions were they admitted?
6.	Was there any representation made to the Government as to the necessity of Asiatic labour? If so, by whom?
7.	Was there any representation made to the Government against such immigration? If so, by. whom?


Mr. CAHILL:: 1.	Has any money been paid to the Dundalk Herald, the Flesherton Advance, the Markdale Standard, the Durham Chronicle, the Grey Review, or the Hanover Post, for advertising or for any other reason since October 1, 1917?
2.	If so, how much was paid in the case of each of the papers mentioned?



RESTRICTION ON SALE OF PROVINCIAL AND MUNICIPAL SECURITIES.


Rodolphe Lemieux: that people, scattered over a very .large territory, in order to 'minister to the local wants of that vast country, has adopted the federative system. It follows, as a matter of course, that if you have this federative union you must have legislative independence for each of the local legislatures.
Although that sound principle, Mr. Speaker, was embalmed in our Act of Confederation, it has been assailed many times since 1867, and the old feuds about the relative powers and jurisdiction of Dominion and provincial parliaments are still fresh in our minds. Sir John Macdonald accepted in the last resort, the principle of federative union. But it is only too true that in the years following Confederation, when Sir John - Macdonald was in office, he on 'many an occasion challenged provincial autonomy. I need only refer to the classical cases, if I may so term them, which were the bones of contention between the Dominion and the various provinces', notably Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba and the Maritime Provinces. Let me mention only a few of those oases to refresh the memory of the Provincial Rightists whom I see before me. There were the Insurance case, the Escheats case, the Liquor Licensing case, the Rivers and 'Streams case; and last, but not least, the famous Ontario, boundary dispute. 'In all those cases the uncompromising champion of centralization was Sir John Macdonald, and the uncompromising champion of provincial autonomy was Sir Oliver Moiwat. The provinces, and indeed, the Dominion, owe that great statesman a debt of gratitude for his unfailing devotion to the cause of provincial rights. His policy may toe summed up in, the one sentence: the provinces were sovereign in their authority in order to make Canada united in its diversity. That policy, Sir, which had as its champion the late Sir Oliver Mowat, rallied around it the prime ministers of the then existing province^', and many of the giants who played so prominent a part in the affairs of this country in the Dominion Parliament, notably the late Edward Blake, and my right hon. friend the present leader of the Opposition (Sir Wilfrid Laurier).
That policy, Mr. Speaker, has been sustained by many judgments of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The battle for provincial rights has been won. At least that was my impression, and it was the impression of the public, until the month of December 'last when, after the election, an Order in Council was passed by the present Government, which I shall read in.

a few moments. I may be told that the fact of our being at war necessitated extraordinary and drastic measures. It is true that we are at war. It is also true that drastic measures are sometimes necessary, provided, however, they are in keeping with the -spirit and within the four corners of the British North America Act, which is the Constitution of Canada. But the substitution of Orders in Council for Acts of Parliament on important matters such as the one to which I shall refer, is a dangerous weapon in the hands of any Government. The more dangerous is that weapon when such Orders in Council override, yes, directly override, the constitution. I claim that this is precisely what happened when in December last the Government attempted by Order in Council to control the borrowing powers of the various provinces of this Dominion. In order to make this point clear I shall quote the ipsissima verba of the Order in Council passed on the 22nd of December, 1917. It reads:
Whereas it is advisable that the Canadian investment market should' be conserved to facilitate the borrowing of the large sums of money that will be required for the prosecution of the war and to enable His Excellency's Government, if need be, to fully avail itself of the loaning capacity of the country for the paramount purposes of national defence, and that the impairing of the market should be prevented: by forbidding the offering and sale thereon of securities for raising money for purposes the execution of which may in the public interest be postponed until peace has [DOT]been restored, provision toeing made for the issue by the Minister of Finance of a certificate permitting the offering and sale of such securities as the said Minister shall dieem proper to except from such prohibiten;
Therefore His Excellency the Governor General in Council on the recommendation of the Minister of Finance and under the provisions of The War Measures Act, 1914., is pleased to enact the following regulations and the same are hereby made and enacted accordingly :
1. It shall he unlawful within Canada, hy or on behalf of any provincial, colonial or foreign government, municipality, commission, local government, institution, corporation or incorporated company, to issue, sell, offer or advertise for sale, any bonds, debentures or other securities evidencing an obligation to repay money borrowed, which may hereafter be issued by or on behalf of any such colonial or foreign government, municipality, commission, local government, institution, 'corporation or incorporated company as aforesajd, or any shares which may hereafter be issued of the capital stock, whether preferred or common, of any such corporation or incorporated company, or to purchase or agree to purchase any of the bonds, debentures or other securities or shares of capital stock aforesaid, unless the offering and sale thereof within Canada shall have 'been first approved by the Minister of

Finance by his certificate of approval in writing:
Provided, that nothing herein shall affect the issue, offering, advertising, sale or purchase of any bonds, debentures or securities of the Government of Canada, or the trading in any bonds, debentures, securities or shares of capital stock, heretofore issued and placed upon .the, market, or which shall have been originally issued' and placed upon the market with the approval of the Minister of Finance evidenced by his certificate as aforesaid.
The Order proceeds to declare that it will be a criminal offence to ignore its provisions. Now, Mr. Speaker, I must express my surprise that this Order in Council was passed by a Union Government. I can well imagine old members of the Conservative party who form part of this Government, and who are disciples of the late Sir John Macdonald, appending their signatures to such an Order in Council; but I am surprised beyond expression to find that such staunch provincial rightists as some of the hon. gentlemen who compose the present Government should have given their assent to it. On the other hand, I am pleased to know, and I say it with pride, that the first voice raised against this encroachment on provincial rights, was the voice of the Prime Minister of Quebec. Immediately this Order in Council was passed, the Attorney-General of Quebec, Sir Lomer Gouin, speaking for his Government, used the following language:
That in the opinion of the undersigned, these regulations are beyond the powers of the Federal Parliament which could neither adopt them directly, nor delegate the powers to enact them to the Government of Canada;
That the effect of the said regulations is to restrict the rights, powers and prerogatives of provincial governments, and, in particular, of the government of this province, in so far as regards the matters which the constitution governing us confers exclusively upon them, and that nothing in the British North Amerioa Act, 1867, justifies such an encroachment;
That the Order in Council in question was passed without the government of this province having been informed thereof, and that the knowledge that it acquired of it was so acquired through the press.
That it is of importance to strongly protest against this manner of interpreting our constitution by the central government, and against this attempt to do away with a right exclusively belonging to the provinces.
For the above reasons, the hon, the Attorney General recommends:	1. That the
Government of Canada be informed that it is the intention of the government of this province to consider these regulations as illegal, unconstitutional, and in no wise binding on this province.
.2. That a notice be published in the Quebec Official Gazette informing the public that in the opinion of this government the said Order in Council, dated 22md December, 1917, concerning the issue of bonds and debentures in
Canada is illegal and unconstitutional as far as this province is concerned.
I do not know the nature of the other protests which came from the other provinces, but I am sure that the Government did receive protests from some of the western provinces. I know that there w.a,s one from Manitoba and one from Nova Scotia; probably there were others.
I agree with the opinion expressed by the Attorney General of the province of Quebec that this Order in Council of 22nd December encroaches upon the rights of provinces generally, and therefore is absolutely unconstitutional. I cannot for the life of me understand the reasons which impelled the Government to act in that drastic fashion towards the Provincial Governments. The Order in Council was passed, immediately after the Victory loan, was launched and after all provincial governments had in every particular co-operated with the Minister of Finance to make that loan a success. Speaking of my own native province, I may say that the Government ,of Quebec subscribed a very large amount to the Victory loan-in the neighbourhood of 11,000,000, I believe. I may ibe wrong as to the figure, but in any case it was a very large sum. I cannot too- strongly-how shall I say it-denounce the manner in which this Order was passed and made public. No notice was given,; no consultation with provincial executives was had. I honestly believe that in this very serious time of financial stress through which we are passing, no better means could have been devised to impair and to shatter the credit of the provinces on the foreign markets.
I submit, then,, that this Order in Council constitutes ,an encroachment on provincial rights1. Wihat .is the guiding principle in the matter of the borrowing powers of the Dominion Government and the provincial legislatures respectively? By section 91, subsection 4, of the British North Am&riea Act, the Dominion Government is given, it [DOT]is true, exclusive legislative authority with respect to the borrowing of money on the public credit. Though general in,terms, this expression, "the borrowing of money on the public credit," must manifestly be, and, I submit, is, restricted by the context. How is it so restricted? In the enumeration of the executive powers of the provincial legislatures-section 92, subsection 3 of the British North America Act-we read the following: "The borrowing of money on the sole credit of the province." If it is suggested that there is a conflict between the right of the Dominion Government and that of the

maintains its position in view of the protests which came 'from the various provincial governments.


Charles Joseph Doherty: that it would be possible for it promptly and effectively to take any or every step that it might deem to toe necessary or advisable by reason of the conditions created by this unfortunate war.
For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I think that, upon loking into the terms of the Order in Council, and more particularly its effect, it becomes clear that there is not any intention to attack any constitutional power of any province, and that in its effect it results in no infringement upon the legislative or executive power of any province; that it merely makes available to this Dominion of Canada-to the exclusion of the provinces it is true, as well as to the exclusion of all other bodies whatsoever and of all other persons- the money market of Canada, the borrowing power of the people of Canada.
'Now, action of -this kind is not without precedent. In the United Kingdom., at a very early -stage of the war, the Imperial Govemme-nt, found it necessary to -take over -into -its own hands the entire control of its -money market and to absolutely either exclude or restrict the access to that money market. It is not -surprising that the Government of Canada should have found itself in the same position -and1 in face oil the same necessity with regard to the money market of Canada. Of course, in the United Kingdom there was no room for the suggestion- even of -any constitutional question- with regard to it. I respectfully submit, IMr. Speaker, -that there is in this country as little ground for raising a constitutional question with regard to this exercise of power on- the part of th-is Government. It is true -that we necessarily must keep within the limits of the British North America Act, whereas the Parliament of the United Kingdom has no -such restriction imposed upon it. But so long as we keep within the limits of th-e powers conferred upon Parliament by that Act-.and I respectfully submit that w-hat I have said makes it clear that we have done that-even if it -did happen that inconvenience results to the provinces and other would-be borrowers, that .i-s no sufficient reason to question^ the constitutionality of -the action taken -by the Government in this Order in Council.


Mr. ARTHUR TRAHAN (Nicolet):: Mr. Speaker, il w-ish to say a few words in support of the motion. I do not intend to deal with the constitutional question but there is another point of view to which I desire to draw the attention of the

members of this House. The preamble of this Order in Council says:
Whereas it is advisable that the Canadian investment market should he conserved to facilitate the borrowing- of -the large sums of money that will be required for the prosecution of the war, and to -enable His Excellency's Government, if need be, to fully avail itself of the loaning capacity of the country for the paramount purposes of national defence, and that the impairing of the market should be prevented -by forbidding the offering and sale thereon of securities for raising money for purposes the execution of -which may in the public interest be postponed until peace has been -restored, provision being made for the issue by the Minister of Finance of a certificate permitting the offering and sale of such securities as the said- Minister shall deem proper to except from such -prohibition-.
I quite agree, Sir, that -sacrifices of liberty, and -temporary suspension of laws can be justified when- they -are the result of imperious -and unavoidable necessities for nation-al defence. But, when they are not strictly based on -such considerations, and if they toe only the result of the natural tendency of all governments -to reach after additional power; if they he the immediate consequence of the executive's ecom -towards Parliament, provincial legislatures, municipal and similar institutions and the rights- of citizens, -then the -sacrifice of civic liberties and the suspension- of laws are without any possible excuse, and are illicit and worthy o-f blame. In European countries, where war exists, they have under similar circumstances for the salvation of the nation, suspended temporarily the application o-f certain laws, but they have never violated their constitutions. By this Order in Council our constitution is tom like a scrap of paper, as has been fully demonstrated toy my hon. friend (Mr. Lemieux). Supposing for the sake of argument that this Order in Council is absolutely constitutional, was the Government confronted by perils and unavoidable exigencies- of national defence sufficient to justify it? To this question I believe we can answer in the negative. In support of this contention I will quote the opinion of a man whose judgment cannot be suspected of partisanship, and whose opinion is reported in The Montreal Gazette of March 21 as follows:
r
Toronto, March 20.-Judge Denton has decided in favour of the London Life Insurance Company in the action brought by Mrs. M. F. Skimin for $500, life insurance on her soldier son Private Garnet Redvers Skimin, killed in action July 25th, 1916. An appeal will be taken.
The question placed before Judge Denton was whether young Skimin was engaged in a military enterprise for the defence of Canada from invasion at the time of his death.

The Company claimed that within the terms of the policy Skimin was not so engaged, and therefore they were not bound to pay the amount of the policy.
Mr. Justice Denton, who rendered judgment in this case, is a member of the Supreme Court of Ontario. I concur in his [DOT]view when he holds that this war is not a military enterprise for the defence of Canada against the invasion of an enemy, and I believe that I am right in concluding that the motive of national defence invoked in the preamble of the Order in Council in question for the purpose of justification, is, unfortunately, not well taken.
Moreover, there are many other reasons which militate against this Order in Council. In the Order in Council provision is made for the issue by the Minister of Finance of a certificate permitting the offering and sale of such securities .as the minister may deem proper to except from such prohibition. How would that work, Sir? Either the sale of all such debentures will be authorized by the Minister of Finance, or authorization will be refused, or authority will be partly granted and partly refused, at the discretion of the minister. If the authorization for sale of all such securities is granted then this Order in Council is useless, and is only an encroachment upon the provincial autonomy, against which I strongly protest- If you interfere with provincial autonomy, Sir, you are going to break up Confederation, and that would be a national calamity.


Wilfrid Laurier: Hear, hear.


Arthur Trahan: 
Arthur Trahan: Before the election the Government promised the abolition of patronage. But now, by this Order in Council they have created a new source of patronage. Therefore, from whichever point one examines this question, one must conclude that the Order in Council which we are discussing is nefarious and contrary to the public interest and to sound principles of public policy. For the reasons I have' given, I, therefore, ask the Government to show that due respect for the law which is a guarantee of the peace, good order, liberty, prosperity and greatness of the nation. The Government must be the first to observe that respect, the first to present an example of proper regard for the Constitution. Otherwise the tampering, the manipulation, or, if you will permit me to use a French word the better to express my idea, the sabotage by the Government of the Constitution will tend, sooner or later, to bring about sabotage of the laws of the country by the people at large. I submit, Sir, that this Order in Council ought to be immediately repealed, because in my humble judgment it is an unqualified violation of the Constitution, an unjust encroachment upon provincial autonomy, harmful to Canadian credit and the development of our resources to their full extent, and because I am desirous of upholding Canadian interests above everything else and for all time.


Hon. A. K. MACLEAN (Acting Minister' of Finance):: Mr. 'Speaker, the hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat (Mr. Trahan) contends that this Order in Council was promulgated by the Government purely and solely for the purpose of invading the jurisdiction of the provincial legislatures and of prohibiting school hoards, parishes and provinces from raising money by the sale of securities. The hon. gentleman left ime with the impression that it was his view that the Government had no other .purpose in the promulgation of this Order in Council than that .provincial and local interests should be harassed and their rights invaded. Of course, if my hon.

friend chooses to look at the matter in this, spirit he cannot possibly understand the reason or the purpose for which the ,Order in Council was passed. Personally, I cannot see why there should he any lengthy and serious argument upon the constitutionality of this Order in 'Council. I do not object to the provincial legislatures making their protests upon constitutional grounds; the matter may he debatable as a constitutional question. But I do say that in all the circumstances the provinces, having once stated their objection and expressed their opinion as to the constitutionality of the Order in Council, might well noiw let the matter there stand.
I do not agree with the hon. gentleman from Maisonneuve (Hon. Mr. Lemieux) when he says that the Order in Council was received with pain and surprise by the people of Canada. I deny that assertion. I have, during the past few weeks, come in contact with representatives of many of the provinces o,f Canada and have had expressed to me Iby members of provincial governments their approval of this Order in Council. In fact, I know of only one province in Canada which has gone to the trouble of expressing at length a formal protest against the OrdeT.
I refer to the province of Quebec-although the intention and purpose of tire Government in enacting this Order in Council having been explained, the Government of that province has, I think, also changed its view, if not from the constitutional viewpoint, at least 'from the practical standpoint.
Does the hon. member for Nicolet (Mr. Trahan) mean to tell me that the financial necessity of the country in these days should give way to small parochial and provincial interests? He states that the motive in passing this Order in Council was to attack the borrowing powers of school boards, parishes and provinces; that it is an attempt to break the constitution. Well, I do say this: in these days provincial and parochial rights must, if necessary, give may to national interests. It is more important to save this country than it is to save the borrowing powers of small borrowing bodies. This Parliament has no desire-neither has the Government-to invade the jurisdiction of the provincial legislatures; but in these days the Government must, at many times, do things which in ordinary times it would not attempt.
Let me explain in a few words the reasons which impelled the Government to pass this Order in Council. In carrying on civil Government and paying for our participation in this war, we are necessarily

obliged to raise in one form or another a great deal of money. Hon. gentlemen know as well as I do that it is not possible tors-,ise the necessary large amount for these purposes by the ordinary forms of taxation. We must, in the first place, provide sufficient revenue to carry on civil Government, and, in the next place, raise sufficient revenue to pay for carrying on our part of the war. Not only that; we must provide from time to time credits for carrying on the trade and commerce-of the country. We could not export wheat; we could not export cheese; we could not export anything to-day unless the Government of Canada provided the financial resources or the credit in some form or other. In other words, the country must be self-contained financially; therefore, it is necessary that we be borrowers -within Canada and for large sums. With these huge commitments for the present and for the future, is it unreasonable to say by Order in Council-particularly when, we have the authority-that provinces, municipalities, companies and private individuals shall not issue and sell securities except by license of the Federal Government? It never was the intention of the Government that by this Order in Council provincial governments should be prohibited from borrowing upon the Canadian market. We realized that provincial governments could not go outside of Canada to borrow. None of the provinces can borrow to-day outside of Canada; neither can the Federal Government itself. When the Order was promulgated it became the policy of the Government to assist the provinces so far as they were unable to do so themselves by borrowing. Up to the present time one province has been loaned the sum of $2,500,000. The Dominion Government is also committed to make an advance of $3,000,000 to another province,, upon terms, of course. A province which could not borrow upon fair terms in this country to-day could not borrow outside.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Which province,, if you please?
Hon. A. K. * MACLEAN: I do not care to-mention the province.


Mr. BUREAU:: Why not?


Mr. DEVLIN:: That is important.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It is not important.'


Jacques Bureau: It is.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That is altogether a question of judgment, and I pro-

pose to use my own judgment in the matter, for the time being, at least.


Jacques Bureau: The Order in 'Council, I suppose, makes it unimportant. t


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: We have made it known to all the provincial governments that in the event of their requiring to borrow any substantial sums of money and being unable to make favourable loans in Canada, we shall advance them the sums required for a period of five years at the rate [DOT]of six and one-half per cent interest, taking the obligation of the borrowing province therefor. Let me repeat that, so far as I know, no province in Canada, since being acquainted with the purposes for which the Government promulgated this Order in Council, has made any objection to it. It would be very undesirable and detrimental to the national interest to have municipalities or corporations selling on the Canadian money market large loans at low prices, which some would in many cases be obliged to do. This would affect adversely our market for Victory Bonds in the future. Last year over $400,000,000 was borrowed in this country by the Canadian Government, practically for carrying on our part of the war, by the sale of Victory Bonds. It will be necessary at the latter part of the present year again to appeal to the Canadian people for a similar loan, and by the same means. It is obvious, therefore, that if provinces and municipalities were allowed to go upon the market making loans at expensive rates, the market might be very seriously impaired for Federal purposes, when we again ask the Canadian public to subscribe to a further issue of Victoria Bonds for the purpose, really, of carrying on the trade and commerce of the country and for paying for our participation in the war. At least the Government is of the opinion it should have power to control the same if necessary.
Mr. Speaker, the argument made by the Minister of Justice convinces me that in the circumstances our jurisdiction is complete; that no constitutional argument can be urged against the validity of the Order in Council. As the Minister of Justice states that what we have done is to expropriate the money market of this country for Government purposes. We have not attempted to prevent provinces, or school boards, or parishes from issuing securities and selling them outside of Canada. We have not attempted to prevent provinces from imposing taxation for provincial purposes or anything of that character. All that we do say is that the Canadian money market may be necessary,
even for the preservation of our national life, and if that be so, the Government were and are now of the opinion that we should exercise the right, if we have the power, of controlling, until the termination of the war, the securities which will be placed upon the money market of this country, and I think hon. gentlemen, upon reflection, will be disposed to agree with that view.
In the exercise of the control of issues made by provinces or municipalities or corporations, great care should, of course, ibe exercised. So far, I do not think a license has been refused iby the Department of Finance. Our action, however, has had the effect that many issues would have been made were it not for the passage of this Order in Council; that is to say, that- many persons knowing that their proposed issues were of very questionable importance, and perhaps even detrimental, to the country at this time, have declined to proceed with their promotions of one kind or another, and consequently have refrained from appearing before the Finance Department to ask for a license to sell issues of securities or shares. I promise my hon. friend from Maison-neuve (Mr. Lemieux) that in exercising the discretion to refuse qr to grant a license to make issues of securities in this country the best judgment will Ibe used. I do not think that up to date any body, any person, or any province is in a position to complain of the exercise already made by the Government under the authority conferred upon it by the Order in .Council, and I do not think any opportunity will be given to make objection to the discretion which the Government may exercise in the future.
\


Right Hon.   S@: With the object which the Government may have had in passing this Order in Council, that is, to secure to themselves primarily and preferentially to anybody else the financial resources of the country, no one can find fault. I agree altogether with my hon. friend that it .is of the utmost advantage, and I would say more, even necessary, that the Government should endeavour to obtain for themselves, in preference to everybody else, what financial strength there is in this country. The only question is as to the method by which <the Government have attempted to carry out this purpose, which is laudable in itself.
5 p.m. They want to keep for themselves the available finances of *Canada. The question is whether or not they have, under our constitution, the power to deprive the provinces, and all the other bodies which derive their powers from

the provinces, of a similar advantage. My hon. friend has made a very complete and concrete case to the effect that the British North America Act specifically, in so many words, gives to the provinces the power to borrow. Section 92 of the British North America Act reads:
In each province the legislature may exclusively make laws in relation to matters coming within the classes of subjects next hereinafter enumerated, that is to say,-
The borrowing of money on the sole credit of the province.
This is so clear that the Minister of Justice does not attempt to dispute it, but his answer to my hon. friend (Mr. Lemieux) in regard to this, was very technical and, might I say, sophistical. His whole argument was this, land nothing else: We do not propose and we did not intend to, and we did not, in fact, interfere with the powers of the legislatures to borrow; that is to say, notwithstanding the passing of this Order in Council, the legislatures have this power to borrow just the same as they had before. Of course, they have. But laws are passed to be executed; laws are passed to have their effect. The Legislature of Ontario or the Legislature of Quebec may pass a law to borrow money, but it cannot execute that law if this Order in Council places that power in the hands of the Dominion Government. Thus' the Minister of Justice leaves to the provinces a power which is barren and of absolutely no effect at all. Why was this power given to the provinces? Because it was well understood that the provinces in carrying out their undertakings might have to borrow, and if a province can pass laws, but cannot execute them, it is mere sophistry to say that the power of the province is not invaded. (If a province has the power to pass laws, but not the power to execute them, there is invasion of its power. The argument of my hon. friend iis simply sophistical, and it is mere playing with words to tell us that a legislature has power to pass laws which it cannot execute. When it was understood that their powers were being invaded, some of the provinces took alarm and claimed that the Dominion Government was going beyond its powers and was endeavouring to take away from the provinces powers which they had absolutely. I cannot see how my hon. friend can escape from the argument I have made on this point. The Order in Council goes too far. The Minister of Justice said that, under the law, we have, in war time, the right of eminent domain. We have the right of eminent
fSii Wilfrid Laurier.]
domain at all times, in time of war as well as in time of peace. We can expropriate the property of an individual. We can pass a law to-morrow to take the property of (Mr. 80 and: 80, hut I do not believe that under the constitution we have the power to expropriate the property of a province.


Robert Laird Borden: I think it has
been held otherwise in the United States.


Wilfrid Laurier: 1 have not
heard of and I would like to know of a case in which it has been held otherwise.


Robert Laird Borden: I am speaking
from recollection. I remember having had occasion to look into the matter a few years ago, and I discovered, a good deal to my surprise, that, if .my recollection is correct, the power of the Federal 'Government to expropriate the property of a state 'Government has been recognized.


Wilfrid Laurier: 
Robert Laird Borden: We are both surprised.


Wilfrid Laurier: It may he that under the constitution of the United States there is such a right, but any right hon. friend will not deny that up to the present the interpretation of the constitution of 'Canada has been that the legislative powers of the provinces were paramount within their .spheres' and that the legislative power iof the Dominion wias paramount in its isiphere. If that be the proper interpretation of the constitution, I claim that in this country we have no such power as any right hon. friend has just stated. My hon. friend isaid a moment ago that only the province of Quebec had protested. I think I am. right in saying that the provinces' of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Allberta have also protested in the same manner as the province of Quebec. But I shall be sorry to dispose of that question simply upon a technical matter of this kind. While I am altogether behind the Government in their endeavour to secure to themselves primarily and in preference to everybody else the financial 'resource's of the' country, the Government, In my estimation, acted very unwisely when they acted as they did.
If they had .consulted the provinces before, as they did afterwards, the question might have been settled otherwise and they would have obtained the unanimous consent of all the provinces. If they had said to the gov-

ernments of the different provinces, "We are to-day-in the midst of an immense danger, the cause for which -we are fighting is paramount, and everything must subside before it " the governments of the provinces would have been willing to stand behind them. If the Government had said to the provinces: " If you have to borrow money, we ask you not to borrow it .from outsiders but give ue the privilege of lending it to you,"' it would have been much better. They might have made the same suggestion to the municipalities. The Acting Minister of Finance said they would have lent the provinces the money themselves. If they had said to the provinces, "Do not got to market and try to borrow, but come to us and let ue assist you" that would have been the proper course, and I would highly commend the Government for taking it. My only regret is that they should have, in an unduly and in the most highhanded manner, attempted to override the power which the provinces acquired. We must avoid, as far as we can, all difficulties of this nature in normal times, and we must still more avoid them in wax times..


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: Mr. Speaker, I desire to express my gratification that the leader of the Opposition thoroughly agrees with the policy which has been carried out, which was aimed at being carried out, under this Order in Council. The manner in which it has been done appears to be displeasing to some hon. gentlemen. The constitution would appear, in the words o.f the other speakers, to 'be in great danger, and, having been, for .many years, one of the men referred to by the hon. mover of this resolution, as strongly in favour of the maintenance of provincial rights and the careful guardian of constitutional privileges from the provincial standpoint, I feel that I should not neglect the opportunity, on hehal.f of the provinces of thanking the hon. , gentlemen- for the extreme interest which they now take in the rights of those provinces. There were times when we could not get quite such strong views from some of them, or even from- some of the members on this side of the House in regard to the rights of those provinces, and I am glad to say it is now generally conceded that the constitutional privileges of provinces should be recognized in all respects. In regard to this particular question the argument appears to be one that might more properly be addressed to the Privy Council when this question finally reaches there after the conclusion of the war. The brief that the hon. mover of the resolution had
prepared was an extremely good one. It was one that would be very useful in arguing legal questions, but as he himself recognized, it is possible to prepare a brief on both sides of nearly every constitutional question that has arisen since Confederation. There has never been any great difficulty in getting eminent legal gentlemen to prepare very excellent briefs on both sides of the many constitutional questions that he has brought to the attention of the House this afternoon, and there has been, on many of these occasions, a reference to the constitution of the United States. It is one of the favourite places to go for analogy. The constitution of the United States, of course, varies considerably from the constitution of Canada. Their constitutions are ever so much more exact in their wording, being all written, and not depending upon common law at all. It is very easy to argue in regard to what is done and what is not done in the United States. But even in the United States, when occasion arises, we find that the Federal Government assumes authority, as the Federal .Government does hereon occasion, and the framers of the constitution of the United States would probably have been much surprised if they foresaw that such powers would be assumed as have been assumed by the Federal Government, We find that when the United States declared war their President assumed the power, as a war measure, of confiscating hundreds of millions of dollars worth of property of individuals in the various states, and we find that only the other day the President of the United States assumed control of thousands of miles of railway that were chartered by the various states of the Union, and that were not under the Federal control. These, Mr. Speaker, are matters of the same nature as are provided for in the Order in Council that has been under discussion this afternoon, and while I am not going to discuss this matter from the legal .standpoint, as has been done so well by the Minister oif Justice and by the mover of the resolution, I say that in this- case, as in the oases I referred to, the Government of this country has only done what it was expected by every citizen of the Dominion it should do, to get the money that was actually necessary to conduct the war and to-carry on the affairs of this country. This course may properly be followed further, and it may have to be followed further, if this country is to do what is absolutely essential at the present time. The-question is vastly more important, even, for the provinces themselves and the various-

municipalities, than the purely technical question as to whether, for a short time, their powers have been infringed upon by this Order in Council. It is quite proper for those provinces to file a protest with the Minister of Finance in connection with this matter; quite proper for them from a purely provincial standpoint to see that their rights are not infringed upon in a permanent way without protest. I must differ from the right hon. leader of the Opposition in regard to what 'the proper course was, because not one of those provinces would haVe felt they were justified, if they had been asked previously, in giving up one jot or tittle of their provincial authority to the Federal Government. But, it being an accomplished fact, every one of those provinces, I believe, is prepared to join in heart and soul and assist the Minister of Finance in the getting of the money that is absolutely essential at this time.


Mr. LTJCIEN CANNON (Dorchester) (translation):: Mr. Speaker, I have listened very attentively to the remarks of the hon. Minister- of Customs (Mr. Sifton) and I must admit that his remarks somewhat surprised me, all the more so since he belongs to those western provinces for which the hon. leader of the Opposition did so much while he was at the head of the public affairs of this country.
The hon. minister felt called upon to reproach the hon. leader of the Opposition with having given expression, this afternoon to ,what is for him a new idea, the idea of protecting the autonomy of the Canadian provinces. I do not know if the hpn. minister has a short memory, or whether his knowledge of public affairs is not sufficiently wide, but despite my youth and my inexperience, and although I have seen less of public life than he, I remember, Mr. Shaker, the struggle carried on by the hon. leader of the Opposition for the autonomy of the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, at a time when his own province threatened to turn against him because of his principles. But the hon. leader of the Opposition on that occasion proved that he was not a politician who. varied his principles to suit the circumstances, but that, always, he guided himself and his party by the immutable principles of that Liberalism to which we belong this year, as we belonged last.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to answer the hon. minister in the English tongue, but I hope that he understands me when I say that we, the Liberals of the province of Quebec, were the first to fight for the liher-
	-
ties which his Government, a Government whose leader he remained until recently, have turned to their advantage.
NTr. .Speaker, I do not wish to retain the attention of this House very long. The main question brought up by the hon. member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Lemieux) was very ably discussed by the mover, as by the hon. Minister of Justice (Mr. Doherty). But permit me, Mr. Speaker, as a Liberal, to say this; the question before the House today is not a new one. It is the great question which has been raised in all the centres of colonization where the English, after leaving the old land of liberty, came here, on Canadian soil, to open up to civilization a new domain.
When the American colonies struggled and fought against the central power, why did they do so? To try and prevent that central power from destroying the liberty of the individual states.
Here in Canada, there is not a man in this House who does not know of the struggles that were fought in the province of New Brunswick, in the province of Nova Scotia, before these provinces became a part of Confederation; neither is there here a man who does not know of the great 'Struggles that took place in this country before Confederation, and while Confederation was being formed, between the Liberals who wanted the provinces to safeguard their own liberty and the. Tories who wanted to centralize all authority in one government.
Mr. Speaker, Confederation was brought about. On what basis was it brought about? It was brought about on the following, basis, to wit: that we should have in this country two Governments; the Federal Government which was to concern itself with all questions of a general character and of a national character; and the provincial governments which were to look after matters of local interest, of a less general character. But, Mr. Speaker, we must not forget that the Act of Confederation is such that the provincial powers are as weighty within the provincial sphere as is the federal power within the federal sphere, and that the government of Quebec, the government of Saskatchewan, the government of Alberta are sovereign governments just as the Government at Ottawa may claim to be.
But, Mr. Speaker, allow me to say this in closing: The hon. minister appealed to the patriotism of those who listened to him. We, of the Opposition, just as much as our friends on the other side of this House, are in favour of the triumph of the sacred cause of the Allies. At this moment we are passing

through a solemn hour. We have as much unrest, as much anxiety in our souls and in our hearts as have our friends on the right. When millions upon millions of men are fighting on the soil of Europe to uphold what is most sacred and most cherished for us all, i.e.: the right to breathe in freedom; when in the old province of Quebec prayers ascend from every hearth for the triumph of the British flag which has given us the constitutional liberties which we enjoy; we must not, while we are laying down our lives, while our children are shedding their blood, we must not forget the fundamental principles which should always guide' the governments of this country; it must not be that while on the one hand we go to shed our blood for the cause of Liberty on the other, in our own country, the provinces lose their prerogatives.
Mr. Speaker, if the Government formed last year is always inspired by the lofty ideas and the great principles which presided at the birth of Confederation; if the Union Government lays aside a policy which sets the provinces against the federal authority and declares for a policy of veritable union, of true understanding, the nine provinces will stand behind it in the prosecution of this struggle which must lead to an ultimate victory, though it may be that just now we are experiencing a few hours of difficulty.
Mr. Speaker, the resolution of the hon. member for Maisonneuve shows that the Liberal party, in this matter, respects the high principles which presided at its birth, which have fortified it in it's struggles, and which allow us young members on this side of the House to hope that as long as these principles are not forgotten, we may perhaps suffer defeat, but the dawn of the morrow will always find us as strong, just as mighty, clothed in the principle which will have guided us thoughout the battle.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Rt. Hon. Sir Robert Borden, Bill No. 11, respecting the Department of Immigration and Colonization, was read the third time.


[Stage Direction]
On the motion of Hon. C. J. Doherty (Minister of Justice), the House went into
Committee on the following proposed resolution; Mr. Boivin in the Chair :
That it is expedient to amend the Penitentiary Act, Chapter 147, of the Revised Statutes, and to provide that the Governor in Council may appoint a Superintendent of Penitentiaries, who shall be an officer of the Department of Justice, and superintend the administration and business of the penitentiaries, and who shall be paid such salary as may be prescribed by the Governor in Council; land three Inspectors of Penitentiaries who shall be classified as officers of the Department of Justice, in sub-division B of the First Division of the Civil Service, and shall each receive a minimum salary of twenty-five hundred dollars per annum.
Rodolphe Lemieux: Will my hon. friend explain?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The reason for introducing this resolution, upon which a Bill is to be founded, consists in the fact that it has been found necessary to provide salaries for the offices that it is proposed to create. The Bill, which will be founded upon this resolution, proposes to modify the present Penitentiary Act in this respect; Under the Act the chief officers in control and having direction of the penitentiaries are two inspectors holding equal rank and performing duties that would belong to an inspector proper, that is the inspection of penitentiaries, and the duty of directing and controlling, under the Minister of course, the administration of the penitentiaries. I have now been connected with the administration of penitentiaries for some few years, and I think I may safely say that in practical operation the system does not work out to the best advantage. It has appeared to me, and I hope when we come to deal with the measure I shall be able to carry conviction to the House, that we would get a more efficient administration of the penitentiaries if we separated the work of inspection from the work of management, control, and direction, taking the latter and putting it into the hands of one officer who, under the minister, would have the responsibility, and providing at the same time for an officer who would hold the title of inspector and who would in reality perform the duties corresponding to that title; that is to say who would inspect the penitentiaries, and report on their condition in order to keep the superintendent, and through him, the department and the minister in touch with what is going on within these institutions. The Bill itself contains provisions, following upon that change of system, with regard to the making of regulations and so forth, transferring in effect that portion of the duties of the present in-



specters which consists in the general direction of the penitentiaries over to the superintendent and making the modifications in the system which are necessitated by that transfer.


Wilfrid Laurier: May I ask the minister in what respect he has found the present system deficient?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It does not seem to me desirable that we should have two officers jointly, and upon a footing of perfect equality, acting in the direction of the penitentiaries. I think unity of control is highly important because it means unity of responsibility. There are great practical inconveniences from combining the duty of direction with that of inspection because the latter necessarily calls for absence from Ottawa. If you are going to have effective inspections of these seven institutions scattered over all the provinces you must necessarily have an officer in a position at any time it is thought desirable to proceed to these different penitentiaries and ascertain what is going on there.
There are advantages even in these visits, perhaps, being made not at stated periods when everybody expects the inspector, but in having all of the institutions in the position where the inspector may drop in at any moment. Now, it is, of course, impossible for the inspector to be in two places at once, "barring he was a bird," as one of my fellow-countrymen said, and we do find it necessary to have some one practically all the time in Ottawa to superintend, control and direct the management of these institutions. I venture to say that it is a more practical and businesslike method to have an officer to do the work of directing operations, and to have officers constantly available for the work of inspection proper. Inspectors, charged simply with the work of inspection, will, of course, not be held as of the same rank and importance as the superintendent or as the inspectors of the present day, and it will be noticed that we provide a smaller salary.


Wilfrid Laurier: May I ask who the inspectors are at the present time?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The inspectors at the present time are Mr. Douglas Stewart and Brigadier-General Hughes. General Hughes is absent on leave, and has been absent since the outbreak of the war, serving his country in a military capacity. That fact, of course, has also hampered our operations-We have been trying to get on with one officer who has been carrying on the duties of superintendence as well as of inspection.


Wilfrid Laurier: I have not the advantage of knowing Inspector Hughes, but I know Mr. Douglas Stewart very well, and he is a very competent officer, and if the hon..minister could show me and the House the importance of providing assistance to Mr. Stewart, I think it would go very far towards the very natural objection to increasing, at this time especially, the personnel of any department. Mr. Stewart has occupied his present position for more than twenty-five years, and he is one of those servants of the public who have given intelligence, zeal and honesty to the discharge of -all his duties, and if the hon. minister were to bring a report to the effect that Air. Stewart is suggesting this arrangement, for my part I should certainly be disposed to agree at once to the change.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am not in a position to say that the change is the suggestion of Mr. Stewart. It is the result, as I said, of my own experience of the administration of these institutions since 1911, and when we come to deal with the measure itself-we are now dealing with the resolution principally with respect to the question of salaries-I hope to be able to satisfy [DOT] the House that the proposed system will prove a more effective one; and while it is true that it will operate to increase the number of officers dealing with this function, I may point out that it will not necessarily operate to increase in any material degree the expense of carrying on the work.


Wilfrid Laurier: I cannot see
that. At present, I understand, we have only two inspectors to do the work. Under this legislation you will have a superintendent of penitentiaries and three inspectors besides, making an increase of two in the staff.


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is an increase of two in the staff, but the two present inspectors cost jointly $8,000. If we have but two inspectors-because we won't necessarily have three-at the salaries mentioned the cost would represent $5,000. If we pay the proposed superintendent the present salary of an inspector, the increase in expense would be only a thousand dollars. While there may be that extra expense, I do very confidently submit to the committee that there must necessarily be an increase of efficiency. It is not a matter of dealing with the personal qualifications of any one holding the office; I am speaking of the system. Where you have a system with one man charged with the direction and the responsibility, and where you have

people who may he thoroughly suitable people to do the inspection charged with the inspection, it does not necessarily follow that the qualities that make a good inspector make a good man to direct and control the administration of the penitentiaries. There is need, I may say, for an improvement in many respects in regard to the carrying on of the work of the penitentiaries, and probably of important changes with regard to the interior administration, more especially in connection with the work to be done by the superintendent. I arm satisfied, and I commend that view to the committee, that we will get a situation where it will be more easy to carry out a proper .system of efficient administration if we divide these two perfectly distinct classes of work, .and if we arrive at a situation where, fox the general direction and control, there is one responsible officer.


Jacques Bureau: Did I understand the Minister of Justice to say that the two present inspectors are costing $8,000 and that the three inspectors will not cost any more, or did I misunderstand him?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I did not say they would not necessarily cost any more- I pointed out that the inspectors, if this Bill be passed, would be officers of a quite different class from the present inspectors, and that the salary, at all events the initial salary that is mentioned, would be such that two of these inspectors will cost but a thousand dollars more than one of the inspectors costs at the present time. That to get the better system it will probably cost something more I do not desire to dispute; but I feel very strongly that the better system, which I am .satisfied could be got by a reconstitution, is worth any increase that it may necessitate. I pointed out that, if we had but two inspectors under this new system, with a superintendent, and if the salary of the superintendent were fixed at the same amount as that of one of the present inspectors who exercise the superintending power, there would be an increase of a thousand dollars in cost.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Whilst I agree with the leader of the Opposition that this is not the time for increased expenditure, I would forgive the hon. Minister of Justice if, in order to increase the efficiency of the administration of the penitentiaries, there would be, following the creation of these two new offices, some sort of prison reform in the Dominion. There is no doubt that *we have many more penitentiaries than we had at the time that Mr. Douglas Stewart
9i
was placed at the head of that service, and that the new provinces and the increased population have at least doubled the duties of that office. The point I wish to make is, that, if the creation of the new offices will give a better administration of the penitentiaries in the way of prison reform, I have no objection to the Bill. My hon. friend (Mr. Doherty) knows by past experience in this House that serious revelations have been made as regards the treatment of convicts in our penitentiaries which certainly drew from the Department of Justice very drastic- reports. I do not go as far as to say that the administration of our penitentiaries should be on a par with the new system at Sing Sing, where the Governor is the pal of all the convicts, although it has been found that that system has worked wonders in some cases.


An hon. MEMBER:: Hear, hear.


Rodolphe Lemieux: But certainly, and I am sincere in what I am now stating, there is need of more efficiency in the superintendence of the penitentiaries. Society is too apt to forget the convict once he has crossed the threshold of the penitentiary, whereas he should be followed into the institution and helped to become a man once more.
It was my good, or bad, fortune, some years ago, to visit the Kingston penitentiary, a splendid institution, but I was sorry on that occasion to notice a number of young convicts of about nineteen years of age associating with older convicts of the age of fifty, sixty, and seventy. I noticed, too, that these young men were breaking stones with the older convicts, and possibly learning by that association the tricks of much more serious crimes than had brought them within the penitentiary's gates. I would [DOT] point out, also, that there are methods of punishment inflicted on the convicts which are out of date, methods which, though quite proper in the middle ages, are in the present century antiquated and out of place. I repeat that if efficiency in the conduct of the penitentiaries will be increased by the appointment of the officers mentioned I raise no objection to the resolution. I sincerely hope that the Minister of Justice will respond to public sentiment on this matter, for that sentiment is not a fictitious one. I do not go the length of saying that you should allow associations of ladies to send flowers to men, condemned to death who are to be conducted to the gallows the next morning; but I say that there are certain means of improving the moral conditions of the convicts which ought to be appreciated by the superin-

tendient of these institutions. Undoubtedly iwe must change some of the methods now *in vogue for the sake of society and in the *best interests of those poor creatures who are unfortunate enough to be incarcerated within the walls of a penitentiary.
Resolution, read the first and second time, [DOT]and concurred in.
Mr. Doherty thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 21, to amend the Penitentiaries Act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first [DOT]time.
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Recess.
The House resumed at eight o'clock.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Hon. C. C. Ballantyne (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) Bill No. 15, to amend the Montreal Harbour Advances Act, 1914, was read the second time and the House went into Committee thereon, the Deputy Speaker in the Chair.
On section 1-C. 41 of 1914 amended so that advance of $9,000,000 may also be used to pay $300,000 of debentures maturing in 1918.
Rodolphe Lemieux: Will the minister
please explain?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: When this Bill was introduced, the member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Lemieux) asked me to advise him what the programme of the harbour commissioners of Montreal would be for the season of 1918. Following the rigid policy ol economy that the Union Government is putting in force, I am holding down as well as I can the expenditure on the port of Montreal for the coming season. The harbour commissioners, subject to my approval, propose to spend during the coming season a total of only $220,000. Their intention is to continue the Montreal harbour system of railways further down the harbour in order to supply the various industries there and new ones which we hope will be located. That is estimated to cost $150,000. Then there is an amount of $15,000 for roadways and railway tracks on wharves. The dredging that will be required in connection with this extension of harbour railways is estimated to cost $50,000. Then there is $5,000 for electric system, power and lighting, making a total expenditure for the coming season of 
$220,000. In 1917 the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal spent a total of $705,000; in 1916, $1,237,918.31; in 1915, $1,922,581.69. The hon. gentleman will see, therefore, that the amount we propose to spend for the coming year is very small compared with the amounts spent in previous years. In addition to the $220,000 expenditure to which I have alluded, an amount of $300,000 will be available to retire the debentures that this Bill calls for.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The committee will be very much interested in the statement which has just been made by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. No work is more familiar to my hon. friend than the work of the Montreal Harbour Commission. Indeed, if I should express regret it is that my hon. friend is not still at the head of that commission rather than in the bad company in which he now finds himself. But, to be serious, while we are speaking of improvements at the harbour of Montreal, may I ask my hon. friend if precautions are being taken in all ports of Canada where munitions are stored to avoid any such disaster as that which occurred at Halifax last December? I am informed by an authority whom my hon. friend knows well- the harbour master of Montreal-that during several months of the year the city of Montreal is exposed to the same danger as that which brought about the disaster which took place at Halifax.
I myself have seen the shells and other munitions there. It seems to me that any such danger can be obviated if proper precautions are taken. The people of Montreal and of other ports through which shells are being shipped look upon the minister to prevent in the future the recurrence of what has happened in the past.


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: I deeply sympathize and so does the Government, with those who suffered by the terrible disaster which overtook the city of Halifax on December . 6th last. So far as the port of Montreal is concerned, one of my first acts when I became minister was to call the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal to Ottawa and to give them the most explicit and clear instruction that for the coming year no high explosive should he stored or loaded in the centre of the port of Montreal, or in what might be more properly termed the congested area. I have arranged that during the coming year all high explosives will be loaded many miles east of congested portion of the Harbour, in what is known as opposite Pointe aux Trembles. That is another reason why we are extending the

railway tracks down there. A special shed is being built for that purpose, and every precaution is being taken to avoid accident. I am also having expert navigators draw up very carefully prepared rules for the guidance of munition ships entering the port of Montrea/1 or any other of the seaports on the Pacific and Atlantic coasts. With the precautions that are being taken in the matter of loading high explosives and the providing of rigid rules for the guidance of munition vessels and all other ships entering seaports, we hope to avoid any such unfortunate disaster as that which took place at Halifax.


Mr. MURPHY:: I observe that the first item of $150,000 covers the greater part of the proposed expenditure during next season. To what service will that item be specifically applied?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: The Harbour Commissioners of Montreal have their own traffic department; that is to say, all the railways bring their loaded freight cars to a certain point and then the Harbour Commissioners' traffic department, with their own engines, pick up the cars and place them at the various sheds throughout the harbour, or take them further east, as may be required.


Rodolphe Lemieux: On their own rails?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: Yes. Prior to the Harbour Commissioners doing that, the port of Montreal was very much congested, because the large railway companies very often used, the harbour terminals as their own railway terminals and thereby very seriously blocked the traffic. When I was a member of the Montreal Harbour Commission my colleagues and I organized what was known as a traffic department. We bought our own engines and had our own expert men to handle the traffic and I think they handled considerably over 100,000 ears during the first season. The Harbour Commissioners have now extended the railway quite a considerable distance ibelow the Vickers' shipbuilding yard, and this $150,000 is to continue it further east so as to serve the large industries that are located in that district.


Charles Murphy: Approximately how far
east?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: The railway at the present time goes down, if my memory serves me aright, about one mile below the Vickers' works, and it is the intention to extend it-I cannot give the exact mileage,
but I should say a couple, and possibly three miles.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported.

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Boivin in the Chair.
Civil Government-Department of Finance and Treasury Board, salaries and contingencies, $203,212.50.
["I have always suggested that tihey should get big men, not only in the minister's department, but in all others, so that when anything unusual comes up, or any big business had to be done, they would not be obliged to run around the country looking fox men. But I would advise the minister to get the very best engineer that he can get, and to make him, not a consulting engineer, but his chief engineer, placing the other officials in their proper order under him. If he has a first class chief engineer iat the present time he does not require a consulting engineer at all. Let him make his best man his chief engineer, and put the others as subordinates under him.\nProgress reported.\nOn motion of Mr. iMaclean the House adjourned at eleven p. m.\nTuesday, March 26, 1918."]
Rodolphe Lemieux: Will the Acting Minister of Finance kindly explain the increases in the various departments?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: There have been no additions to the staff of the department, so that the number of employees in this department is exactly the same as last year, and the increases in salaries are due to statutory increases. Hon. gentlemen will remember that at the last session of Parliament an Act was passed granting an increase of $100 to the second and upward divisions.


Rodolphe Lemieux: A flat increase?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes, and owing to that amendment, and promotions which came in the regular course, the total amount for salaries required this year is about $6,000 more than last year. The other increase is for printing and stationery. Last year this vote was $7,500. This year the department is asking for $15,000. This is due to the fact that larger quantities of stationery than usual are required in the Department of Finance on account of public loans and matters of that kind, and it is also due to the increased cost of paper and stationery. I am instructed that the increase is due entirely to these two facts. There is also an increase of $3,500 for sundries which is also due largely to the increased cost of sundry articles from time to time required by the department.
Civil Government-departments generally- contingencies-care and cleaning of departmental buildings, including amount of $ 10'O to E. Snowdon for firing noon gun, $310,000.


Jacques Bureau: How is the increase of $35,000 justified?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The char service of the Government buildings is attached to the Department of Finance. Possibly it might better be attached to the Department of Public Works.


Jacques Bureau: Was not- that work until this year in the care of the Department of Public Works?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: No. The increase is due to the fact that a larger number of buildings than heretofore are to-day occupied by the Government in the city of Ottawa. It was found necessary during the present year to employ three additional men and 103 additional women. This increase covers increases in wages and the increased cost of isome small materials required from time to time.


Samuel Hughes: Are these additional employees in connection with the Victory Loan?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Partially.


Samuel Hughes: How many additional clerks have, thus far been called into the service on account of the Victory Loan?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I aim unable to
answer the bon. gentleman- at the moment. -The cost of that service is not included in this appropriation. I should imagine there -were some 300 additional -clerks employed by reason of the Victory Loan.


Jacques Bureau: Does that require the
use of an additional building, or is their work being transacted in the offices of the Department of Finance?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It is largely conducted in the offices in the East block occupied by -the Department of Finance, but they are not quite sufficient to house the number of employees, and just a few days ago a building, was, -secured in the city of Ottawa.


Jacques Bureau: Where?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I am unable to say exactly where.


Mr. COPP:: Is the extra rent of the building -secured a few days ago included in. this appropriation?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: No. This has
nothing -to do with rentals of /buildings.


Rodolphe Lemieux: In regard to the housing of the employees of the Department of Finance, I noticed the other day, when going to the office of Mr. Breadner, the gentleman who has charge of the income tax, that hundreds of young girls were being placed in the lobby, working under very great disaibility and under conditions which were not at all hygienic. I do not know if room-s cannot be found in that building and accommodation provided for those young girls. I should say that the accommodation at present is very poor.


Mr. E. LAPOINTE:: What building is that?


Rodolphe Lemieux: The East block.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I am sorry to say a great number of people are employed iu the Finance Department who are obliged to work in- the hallways of the (building. No other space was available in any of the departmental buildings, and space could not be secured anywhere else in the city.


Samuel Hughes: Other places- are being secured, are they not?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The department rented another building somewhere in- the city a (few days ago. I quite agree with my hon. friend that it is hardly a fair way in which to ask employees to work. The department has- in mind asking the Government to construct a temporary wooden building just behind the East block, because it will he necessary to employ a large staff in connection with this loan for some two or three years probably.
Department of Insurance-
Salaries	$ 35,9-50 00
Contingencies	 32,500 00


Mr.  A. K. MAOLEAN@: The details of this item appear on page 36 of the estimates. There is a slight increase in this vote, hut only one additional person has been added to the service. The increase, therefore, is largely attributable to the statutory increases.


Charles Murphy: What services are performed in connection with the item " valuation of securities."
Mr. A. K. M1AOLEAN:	All the insurance^ companies are obliged under statute, to deposit securities with the Government, particularly foreign companies. I am unable to say at the -moment what relation there is .between the volume of the business o,r capital of the company and the amount of securities deposited, 'but at least there are securities in a very large sum deposited with the insurance branch of the Department of Finance, and I assume it is necessary to have responsible clerks to value these securities.
,Mr. MURPHY:	Would that not be part
of the ordinary duties -of s-ome o-f the members o,f the staff? My inquiry is directed to ascertain why there is a special item, as distinct from the salaries paid officials.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It has been customary to have -this item, and I -shall inform my hon. friend about it at some other meeting of the committee.


Jacques Bureau: I see ,an item under " Contingencies " of " Printing,

binding and stationery including cost of annual report, $21,000." Can my hon. friend tell me how .much is paid yearly for the printing of the annual report of the Insurance Department?
iMr. A. K. iMAiCLEAN:	I have not the
information at hand this moment. If the hon. gentleman desires it, I shall be pleased to give it to him at another meeting of the committee.


Jacques Bureau: Looking over the Auditor General's Report I find a departure from the custom of previous years, and that instead of printing the Auditor General's Report in both French and English, the headings only are .printed in French. I suppose that following the same line of economy, the insurance report, as well as the report of unclaimed balances in the banks, would lend itself to being printed in the same way as the Auditor General's Report is printed. It would even be more appropriate to print only the headings of these reports in French than in the case of the Auditor General's Report. If you introduce economy in this way into the printing of the Auditor General's Report, you should .at least provide that items pertaining to Quebec should be printed in French, because they are more looked into by the French people of Quebec than by the people of the other provinces. Be that as it may, if this economy is going to be made in the printing of the report, it ought to be further considered.
Mr- A. K. MACLEAN: The cost of printing and stationery generally, has very much increased over that of two or three years ago. Higher wages are paid to employees, and the cost of paper is very much greater this year than it was twelve months ago. Compared with two years ago I would imagine the increase is at least 100 per cent in some grades of stationery, and more than tOO per cent in other grades. The increase is undoubtedly due to that.


Mr. D. D. McKENZIE:: I do not know whether this is the time to ask the question, but on this matter of printing, might I ask the acting-minister if the departments are managing their own printing now? Is the Printing Bureau managing its own printing, or is it given out in job work, as it often has been? And, if any printing is given out, I suppose now that we have struck the age of economy and no patronage, the work will be given by tender and contract, and not as a matter of patronage. Possibly this is not the time to make this statement, but I am reminding the minister of it, and I would like to know if the Printing Bureau itself is managing the printing of the Government or is it given to outside parties?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Whether the hon. gentleman has asked this question at the right time or not, I think we have struck the age of economy and no patronage in public expenditure-at least I hope so. I cannot answer the hon. gentleman feeling perhaps that I am wholly accurate, but I think the departmental reports are largely printed at the Printing Bureau. Considerable printing, however, has heretofore been done outside, but I have been informed by the Secretary of State, who has charge of public printing, that he anticipates that hereafter the department will be able to do most, if not all, of the printing required by the several departments of the Government.


Mr. A. R. McMASTER:: I hope I will not be regarded as taking an undue liberty if I ask the hon. gentleman on the front benches on both sides to speak louder. Tihey have pleasant little conversations with each other across the Table, but in other parts of the House we are not in the matter at all, and in order to thoroughly understand what is going on, as we would like to do, we must ask hon. gentlemen on both sides to speak louder.


Charles Murphy: My hon. friend (Mr. Maclean), in reply to the member for North Cape Breton, remarked that the Government had struck the age of economy and no patronage. Possibly my bon. friend meant that some of ihis colleagues bad struck it so hard that they had knocked it out completely, and restored the old order of patronage, because I can give soime instances where the old order still prevails. But that, I admit, would not be particularly germane to these estimates. I merely ask what is the extra clerkship, if it has been filled, and, if 'so, by whom?'


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: An additional
clerk was added to the third division on the request of the Superintendent of Insurance.


Charles Murphy: Has it been filled through the Civil Service Commission?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I should think .so.


Charles Murphy: Does my hon. friend
know?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I have knowledge of one appointment to that division within the last three or four weeks and that was filled by the Civil Service Commission.
1.36


Charles Murphy: Is that the one we are discussing?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Jacques Bureau: Can the Acting Finance Minister tell me where the Insurance Report was printed last year, whether at the Montreal Gazette office or at the Bureau?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I cannot answer that question.


Jacques Bureau: Can the hon. gentleman tell me where he is going to get it printed this year?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That report will be printed at the Printing Bureau, if they are at all able to do the work, and, if not, I suppose it will be printed elsewhere.


An hon. MEMBER:: At the Toronto Globe?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I would like to ask if the hon. member for Brome is in the House.


Andrew Ross McMaster: I am here listening.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I need not remind hon. gentlemen that this is a new Parliament with a great many new men. Items of expenditure will strike this House nbw perhaps more vividly and forcibly than at any other time. It is well that it should be brought to its attention that whenever we spend money there must be some good reason for it and hon. members will go home with the impression that this is ai; honest Opposition whatever the Government may be. There is an item of $6,500 for travelling expenses. Some of my gcod friends from the province of Ontario who are accustomed to living on the farm would think that a man would do a lot of wandering around for $6,500. Perhaps it would be well for the minister to fell us what good results the Dominion of Canada got for this expenditure of $6,500.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I hope my hon. friend does not assume anything else than that the country received very substantial benefit for any sum paid out in the past for travelling in connection with the superintendence of insurance. I have before me the Auditor General's Report for 1917 and I would gather from it that this amount was required to pay the travelling expenses of officers of the department because they must travel throughout the provinces of Canada inspecting the several insurance companies doing business. My hon. friend will realize that this is absolutely necessary and that it incurs an expenditure.

We are asking Parliament to vote money for that purpose.
Office of the Auditor General-
Salaries	$ 150,12'5 00'
Contingencies	 10,000 00


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: There are two less employees in this branch of the Department of Finance. The increases in salaries to be paid are due to the fact that in the second division, sub-division B, there have been two advances. In the first division and the third division there is a less number required than last year but the result is an increase in salaries of some $3,000. There is an increase in printing and stationery. What I have said in respect to printing and stationery in the other branches of the Department of Finance is equally applicable to this.


Jacques Bureau: Do I understand the minister to say that the number of employees has decreased and the salaries increased?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Jacques Bureau: How is it that in the Auditor General's office they can decrease the number of employees at a time when the expenditure of the country has increased a thousandfold? If I understand rightly our organization, that is the branch of the public service where all our financial arrangements and expenditures are controlled. I see that in the Department of Finance they are increasing the number of employees, whereas, in the Auditor General's office, which has to scrutinize the public expenditures, they are decreasing the number of employees and increasing the salaries. There may be something in increasing the salaries and trying to get more work out of the men, but I do not believe that as the work increases you are going to get more efficient service by saddling half of the staff with the whole of the work and leaving the others out altogether. If you^ work is going to increase in proportion to the increase in expenditures, I do not understand how there can be a proper audit of the public accounts if you decrease the staff in the way that has been suggested by my hon. friend.


Samuel Hughes: Would the minister 'state the reason for the falling off in the travelling expenses as between 1917 and 1918? Does that item in 1917 include the expenses of the Auditor General's trip to the old country?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think that is the explanation.


Samuel Hughes: Did he submit a detailed report of his visit to the old country?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I cannot answer my hon. friend. I imagine he made a report to the department.


Samuel Hughes: I have not seen it.


Lucien Cannon: What is the meaning of the item: "including advice to the Auditor General?"


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The Auditor General occasionally requires the advice of counsel and I assume it is considered quite proper that we should make it possible for the Auditor General to, obtain it.


Samuel Hughes: Does he choose his own counsel? He does not have to take the counsel assigned to him by the Department of Finance?


Mr. FIELDING:: The very object of this is that he shall have independent counsel if he desires. This is an item that has been in the estimates for many years. In some years I do not think it is used but the object is that if there is a difference of opinion, such as will occasionally arise between the Auditor General and the Government, if he wishes to do so, he may obtain independent counsel. There is nothing new in the item and it is a very useful one:


Jacques Bureau: I am anxious to know
how it is that in the Auditor General's Department, where the wOTk is increasing more than in any other department of the Government, they can afford to dispense with the services of employees. If there is going to be an audit of the expenses, of the public treasury we want to know what kind, of an audit it is going to be. We want to know what kind of economy it is that diminishes the control over the public expenditure for the sake of a couple of, I suppose, very small salaries.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Do I understand the hon. gentleman to take the view that the nuniber of employees in any department of the iGovemiment should not be diminished whether there be reasons for it or not, and that efficiency can only be maintained by retaining the old number in each department? Apparently there is a decrease in the number of employees in this branch, hut I assume that the Auditor General is quite prepared to carry on his work efficiently with the decreased staff as well as he could with the staff of last year. I think it might be said that any department could be carried on much more efficiently by a reorganization and decrease in the number of employees. I had rather hoped that my hon. friend would commend the department for assuming to carry on the work of this branch with a lesser number of employees than before.


Samuel Hughes: Would not the reason naturally be that during the war the expenditures in connection with the ordinary departments of Government have fallen off and are now concentrated in the Militia Department?


Jacques Bureau: Are the accounts of the Militia Department audited by the Auditor General?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I am not personally acquainted with the matter of the auditing of the militia accounts as hon. gentlemen will well understand. I understand that the Militia Department has its own auditing staff, and I assume that its accounts are subject to the control and supervision of the Auditor General. The suggestion is being made at the present time that the auditing staff of the Militia Department be taken over by the Auditor General, and it is now being considered by the Government.


Jacques Bureau: My hon. friend asked me. just now if I thought the efficiency of the department depended upon the number of employees. I do not consider numbers alone, but quality as well- It might be that in other departments you could decrease the number of men just now without affecting the service very much. But what I want to impress upon my hon. friend is that, of all the departments of the Government the one which is most heavily saddled just now on account of the war and of the increased expenditure and the enormous amounts to be vouchered through is the Auditor General's Department, and for the life of me I cannot see how it is that when we were spending 120 millions a year there was a staff the same size as there is to-day, and new when we are spending 300 or 400 millions annually we are going to decrease the number of employees. I do not think the Auditor General can accomplish treble the work by decreasing the number of men at his disposal.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: As I have informed the committee, it will be understood that while the expenditures of the Militia Department are exceedingly great to-day, still they have their departmental audit which, of course, relieves the Auditor General of a great deal of work. A great proportion of the purchases of the Militia Department and of the Naval Department are made by the War Purchasing Commission. In that

branch of the service they have something equivalent to an audit, or, at any rate, their system of conducting the purchases for these departments naturally relieves the Auditor General's staff of a great deal off work. I think it is quite possible for the Auditor General to carry on his wrork with the number of .men he has been accustomed to have, namely about 100. He is an officer perfectly independent of any branch of the Government, and if he feels he has not sufficient assistance he knows that he can readily get it by asking Parliament.


Lucien Cannon: Can the hon. minister tell me where the printing for the department was done last year?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: At the Printing
Bureau largely.
iMr. CANNON:	Not at L'Evenement, at
Quebec?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: 1 am not sure as to that. 'If my hon. friend suspects that there was any done there, or knows that there was, .1 shall be prepared to accept his statement.


Mr.   GANNON@: I have no statement to
make.


Jacques Bureau: Did I understand the
hon. gentleman to say that there were auditors -in the Militia Department and also in the War Purchasing Commission?
iMr. A. K. MACLEAN: No, I did not say they had auditors.


Jacques Bureau: Well, what have they
got?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: They have quite a large staff-[DOT]


Jacques Bureau: Excepting auditors.


Mr.  A. K. IMAOLEAN@: The staff which purchases independently of the departments the necessary commodities for our Canadian army and navy-


Jacques Bureau: That iis not what I want to get at. Who controls the accounts and the amounts that are paid?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Ultimately, they are subject, oif course, to an audit by the Auditor General.
-Mr. BUREAU: 'Then the Auditor General is not relieved of any work that my hon. friend claims he is relieved of by having the purchases made outside the department?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I would think
that -if purchases for our army and navy are made toy an independent commission, established purely for that purpose, it -would tend to lessen the audit work of the Auditor General. 1 think he should feel, at least, that the purchasing would be less liable to errors and1 discrepancies of one kind and another.


Jacques Bureau: What difference is there between the purchases made by an independent commission or purchases made by the Department of Public Works? Will the hon. gentleman insinuate, for instance, that the purchases made by the Minister of Public Works


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The hon. gentleman cannot get me to insinuate anything.


Jacques Bureau: Why should my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works, who is accountable for his department, and who sits in this House where he can be criticised, be _ subject to an audit and a man who has no responsibility whatever, who is appointed by Order in Council, so subject? I say that cannot be explained, and I cannot swallow that explanation.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: My hon. friend has been swallowing it for two or three * years.


Jacques Bureau: I left it to you to test, which you did at that time.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I am talking about the -matter of auditing. My hon. fiiend is putting up a man of straw for the pleasure of knocking him down. If my hon. friend wants me to make some insinuation against somebody else

Mr. BUREAU. No, Mr. Chairman, that is not my way of discussing. I want to get the explanation. I want to know what difference there is between the Minister of Marine and Fisheries and these gentlemen who are appointed by Order in Council in the matter of auditing. You want his accoutits to be audited, but you do not want Mr. Flavelle's accounts to be audited.
iMr. A. K. MACLEAN: The Minister of Militia, or the Minister of Naval Affairs, is as responsible as any other minister for the expenditure of his department notwithstanding the fact that to some extent purchases are made by the War Purchasing Commission for the two departments mentioned. I cannot quite follow the protest of my hon. friend. If it amounts to anything it is this: that he objects to the Auditor General's Department having ninety-nine persons upon the staff. Does

he think it should be 101 or 120? I think he should commend the efforts of the Auditor General to perform his duties with a smaller staff than he had last year.


Jacques Bureau: Mr. Chairman, my hon. friend cannot shift his ground like that. I do not object to the number of men. What I object to is that these gentlemen appointed by the Government, or appointed at the suggestion of the Government, who are not responsible to the people, will buy goods and spend the public money-for, after all, it is our money whether raised toy taxation or by Victory Loans; it is the people's money and they have to pay it back -without being subject to the same surveillance as the other members of the Government who are at the head of a department. One of two things is true: either the Auditor General is relieved of a certain amount of work because the purchases made by this Commission are not audited


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: They are audited.


Jacques Bureau: If so, where does the the Auditor General's relief come in? His work must increase because the amounts to be audited are increasing. If the Auditor General can do ^11 this work with a smaller staff, we have reason to be suspicious and to have doubts as to whether this work is not toeing done in too much of a hurry. Either these accounts are audited or they are not. If ten times the number of accounts are being audited to-day than were being handled two or three years ago, I do not see how he can decrease his staff, unless the Auditor General's Department has been a home for loafers in days gone by. I say the country does not get the protection it is entitled to, and the people have not all the safeguards they should have around the expenditure of this money.
Sir SAM HUGHES; Would there be anything in the suggestion that another party was in power a few years ago, and that the Auditor General required more men to do the work?


Jacques Bureau: 1 refer to last year.


Samuel Hughes: No, when my hon. friend's party was in power.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: My hon. friend (Mr. Bureau) is labouring under some misapprehension. The payments made by the Government, no matter in what branch, are audited by the Auditor General. While it is true that public expenditures are very much greater .this year than in pre-war times, it does not follow that the Auditor
General's staff need necessarily be increased to any great extent. It might not require more work to audit an expenditure of a million dollars than one of $100; possibly it might toe very much easier, because in connection with military and naval affairs expenditures are made involving large amounts in the aggregate, but nevertheless they are very easily audited and the details of the expenditure very easily and readily acquired.


Jacques Bureau: There are new items of expenditure.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I assume, that the number of the staff at the Auditor General's Department as now constituted, namely, ninety-nine, is sufficient to audit the public accounts of this country, tout if that official needs further assistance I suppose he will make the necessary request. Until he does I do not think any department of the Government will be, or ehould be, anxious to add more men to his staff.


Jacques Bureau: Certainly not.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: In my opinion the Auditor General, Mr. Fraser, should be commended by this House for the way in which he carries out his work. I do not think there has ever been a more competent servant of the country than the present Auditor General.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: He carefully scrutinizes
the accounts and he certainly gives entire satisfaction. Any one who goes through the Auditor General's Report will find that whenever there is any doubt as to any items of .expenditure the Auditor General is certain to call for vouchers with respect to it. I have listened to the remarks of my hon. friend from Three Rivers (Mr. Bureau) and to the answers given toy the Minister of Finance, and I think that the point raised toy the former is very well taken, and ought to commend itself to the very serious and earnest consideration of my hon. friend (Mr. Maclean). I am sure that though some people's memory may toe very short, he at least cannot forget that there was a time in his existence when he was a Reformer. When seated on this side of the House he, in common with others in our ranks, sought to suggest certain reforms to the gentlemen occupying the ministerial benches. To-night he has been advieed by another Reformer, (Mr. Bureau) and he meets that advice by the remark: " Oh, well, this has existed three years, and there was no very great criticism about it." What existed two or three years ago

was tlie system of verifying accounts in the different departments.. There has been one Auditor General to review the expenditures for Canada, but a system has grown up under which there are too many auditors in the different departments who try to induce the Auditot General to accept their audit and are not willing that he should criticise the audit .which they make. That system ought to be abolished, and Mr. Fraser should be given the necessary staff to audit all the accounts, I do not care how many it may take. We learned from an Order in Council laid upon the Table the other day that a staff had been appointed through the introduction of an innovation which will cost the country over $200,000. I refer to the staff of the Food Controller. We have that official expending thousands o,f dollars upon food control in this country and from that expenditure we have obtained absolutely nothing. There has been some advice to the women of the country and to the grocers and other dealers, and a great deal of advice to Sir Joseph Flavelle and the companies in which he is interested, but there has been absolutely no action taken. That money could very well be saved to this country. I suggest in all good nature to the new Minister of Finance that one of the reforms which he should inaugurate in the present Government is a reform along the lines proposed iby the hon. member for Three Rivers (Mr. Bureau), viz., to cut out the different auditing systems in the several departments, and place that auditing under the one head, Mr. Fraser. We find, and I am sorry to note it, that the expenditure on civil government for this year is going to cost over $1,000,000 more than it did for the past twelve months. One would almost thin'k that we were going through an absolutely normal period, one -would almost forget that we are passing through the most critical period, not only in. the history of Canada, hut of the Empire. We have been informed by the Finance Minister no later than to-day that we cannot borrow money in the United States or in England, and I know that we are not going to Japan, to the West Indies or to China to try and get it. We have got to raise whatever money we need in this country, and we will do so if the people are in a position to lend whatever money is needed. In view of the prevailing situation it becomes imperative for the new blood in the Cabinet-and there are good and earnest men there-to introduce reforms. Some of the old timber has disappeared, and although some of it is still left, it will disappear.

Mr- ERNEST LAPOINTE: There is very little left of it to-night.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: I suggest to the new timber that they should try and save the money of the people of Canada. A glance at these estimates would not disclose that we are in a wartime period. One would imagine that we could go to Washington as often as we liked and continue those trips that Sir Thomas White made for the purpose of getting money. And yet, the present Minister of Finance tells us that we cannot obtain money outside the country. In that case it becomes imperative to save every twenty-five cent piece, and I say this increasing of staffs and multiplication of departments where they are not necessary is an extravagance. I appeal to my hon. friends upon the other side of the House, who for want of a better name I will call the new timber in the Cabinet, to do their utmost to try and get the old members of the Government to forget the old system of expenditure and audit which used to prevail and try and introduce some reforms.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: On this question it is suggested that the Auditor General does not exercise the same functions or powers as formerly. The ordinary member of the House, such as myself, believes that we have some protection in the Auditor General, that everything in the way of expenditure has to go under his eye, and that he has to be satisfied that it is for a good and sufficiently proper purpose before the money is paid out. If it is the fact that round-about methods have been found by which the vouchers are passed, cheques signed, and the people's money paid out for commodities without undergoing the rigid scrutiny of the Auditor General, we most certainly protest against it. I would like to aek the minister if there were many appeals from the Auditor General this year to the Treasury Board in which the Auditor General was overruled?


Mr. J. D. REID:: I am a member of the Treasury Board, and as far as I am concerned I do not recall any such appeals last year-


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The Minister of Railways understands to what I am referring. He knows that in the past there have been a great many of these appeals in which the Auditor General has been overruled.


John Dowsley Reid: I do not remember of any such case last year.


Samuel Hughes: The Report of the Auditor General will disclose whether there have been any such appeals or not.

Department of Public Works-
'Salaries	$ 574,955 00
Contingencies	 56,000 00


Jacques Bureau: How does that compare
with last year?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: The decrease would be
$45,000 but for the statutory increases, 'which bring it down to about $31,000. In addition, the number of clerks and officials in the department has been reduced from 396 to 350. Among the 350 there are 20 or 21 vacancies which will not be filled. Salaries are provided for in this vote for the 20 or 21 who are not there and who will not be there, but during the year certain officials are entitled to promotion, and if a man is promoted from subdivision B to subdivision A of the second division and theTe .is no provision for his salary in the higher class, :he couild not receive it. This vote is left in the estimates, therefore, for that purpo'Se. I assure the committee that not one of the positions will be filled except by promotion. About 25 men who are away from the department on military service are drawing full civil pay. These are the men who enlistetd prior to the OrdeT in Council of November or December, 1915. Then, we have made up a list of 62 officials who are available for other departments of the Government.


Jacques Bureau: Does that mean dismissal?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: 
Mr. CAHILL:: I notice that in the item for printing and stationery there is a saving of $6,000. Perhaps the Minister of Public Works could inform the acting Minister of Finance (Mr. A. K. Maclean) where he expects to get his printing done.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I have had so many things to think about during the last three or four months that I have not gone into this matter. I only know that my deputy says that he can get along with $11,000 instead of $17,000 and when he tells me that I know he means it- I have no knowledge of where the printing has been done. I do know that the report of the department which I have in my desk-I intended to table it to-day, but I was talking to my colleague when motions were called; I shall lay it on the Table to-morrow-has been very much reduced in size, and that accounts to some extent for the reduction. I cannot give the details now, but I will furnish them to my hon. friend if he so desires. It will be noticed also that there is a large reduction in clerical and other assistance, a reduction of $14,000 in travelling expenses, and a small reduction in sundries. The expenditure for contingencies is reduced from $85,000 to $56,000. I am satisfied that we can keep within the amount asked for in this vote.
Mr. LEM1EUX: We have seen in the press of late that Mr. Horwood has been given leave of absence. Is that a temporary or a permanent leave of absence, and if Mr. Horwood has resigned, on what ground did he do so?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Mr. Horwood's leave of absence is permanent.
Mr. BUREAU; The minister has said that 62 official's are available for other departments. At Three Rivers there is a resident engineer and also a district or consulting engineer. In the Public Works office at that point there is a staff of five or six and I understood when I left home that there was great anxiety among them.

It was reported to me, not that they were to be transferred to other departments, but that they were to have the same fate as Mr. Horwood; leave of absence, the permanency of which would be confirmed. Is there ground for such a fear on the part of these men, and if so are they to be available for other departments, or will their services be entirely dispensed with?
Mr. OAiRVEL'L: The 62 officials to whom I referred are in the inside service at Ottawa; the list has no reference to persons in the outside service. I have not yet been able to make up a list of the officials outside of Ottawa whose services can be dispensed with, either temporarily or permanently. I can assure my hon. friend that the number is very large. I will endeavour to transfer these officials from one part of Canada to another in order to find employment for them where it is possible. I may as well say that it is my opinion that I shall be unable to find employment for a great many of these men. I regret it exceedingly; I realize that it is a hardship, but on account of the reduction of business in the department I see nothing to do but to ask them to obtain employment in some other capacity.
Sir SAiM. HUGHES: Are many of these men fit for overseas service?
Mr. CARVEL I,:	I Teally could not
answer the question. I should imagine that-in fact, so far as I know, every man who comes within the Military Service Act has been drafted. I know some of them have. The great majority of these men are middle-aged men, and I again state I am very sorry to have to make the announcement. There are many good men throughout the Dominion, most of them in the engineering and architectural branches of the department whose services are simply not required, and I have hesitated to relieve them permanently. I am getting reports from every engineering district in Canada; in fact, I have them in most cases. I find that the chiefs of the engineering departments are as reluctant as I am to make recommendations dispensing with the services of those men, but nevertheless that must be done, and while it may be. a hardship, I see nothing to do but to do business on business principles.
iMr. BUREAU: This answer was elicited by my question having special, reference to Three Rivers. I may tell my hon. friend the ex-Minister of Militia (Sir Sam Hughes) that so far as Three Rivers is concerned, the six or seven engineers, into, whose souls

the fear of God has entered and, perhaps a little more, the fear of losing their situation, are all married men and fathers.


Charles Murphy: Has the Minister of
Public Works appointed a successor to Mr. Horwood?
Mr. OARVE.LL: No successor has as yet been appointed.
Mr. .MURPHY:	Does the minister intend to appoint a successor?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I should imagine we
could not get along very well in the Public Works Department without a chief architect.
Mr. LlHMUEUX: Then I would say: Let Mr. Ewart come back, and be chief architect. He has always been a very honest and efficent official, and I do not know why he was put out of the department under the late Administration. Mr. Ewart is quite able to fill the position to the satisfaction of the public.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: 
Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I am not a mind reader; much less would I try to read the mind of the Minister of Railways and Canals.


Jacques Bureau: Especially a year ago.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: 
Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Perhaps we shall be
asking the Minister of Public Works to take us too much into ihis confidence if we ask him how he proposes dealing with the outside service of his department. It is not very large, but there is considerable outside work in connection with the Department of Public Works. Now that patronage is dispensed with and members have nothing more to say about who shall be appointed as inspector of a breakwater, or inspector of a wharf, or inspector of any other work that will be going on outside, the minister would, perhaps, be getting clear of questions if he would tell us once and for all how he proposes dealing with the outside service, who- shall be his agents in order to obtain the service he must have in connection with outside work, and, in short, what method of operation he is going to substitute for the old fashioned way of patronage?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: The answer is very
simple. Immediately on assuming the duties of this office, I invariably ask the engineers of the different districts or the chief government officials of the departments interested to make recommendations to all such positions as those to which my hon. friend has referred. That method was continued for a few months. If my hon. friend will read the Order in Council tabled a few days ago regarding the duties of the Civil
Service Commission, he will find that so far as all employees of every class and distinction are concerned, they must be appointed by the Civil Service Commission. Some of the positions require an examination. In the case of temporary employees and ordinary workmen, which class would include the foremen to whom my hon. friend refers, such appointments are made by the recognized agent of Government-I think those are the words of the Order in Council. I think the names must he sent within thirty days to the Civil Service Commission, who have the right to confirm the appointment. The net result of the transaction will be that the district engineers, so far as the engineering department is concerned, or the superintendent of buildings -I think there is such an official in most of the provinces-will have the right of appointment of the class of officials of which my hon. friend has spoken, subject to the confirmation of the Civil Service Commission. That is the manner in which these people will be appointed.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Does that apply to ordinary labourers?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Yes. The Order in Council says: All temporary employees. That takes in foremen of (works, all persons except those who would come strictly within the Civil Service; that is the class of officials who would require to stand the competitive examination, from a list of which persons the appointments would he made.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: In connection with the engineers, I would like to bring a matter to the notice of the minister. We have in the Maritime Provinces a great many public wharves, breakwaters and structures of that kind, on which a great deal of money has been, expended, and these structures are very useful to the public. Repairs to those structures and wharves generally-almost always-awaited a report from the member. The member for the county would report to the engineer, or to the minister, that such and such a place required some expenditure. Very often that is neglected, and very often no attention is paid to the recommendation the member might make. It might he thought he was looking for patronage or the expenditure of money in his county. I would like the minister to make his engineers responsible for the upkeep of those structures. There are hundreds of thousands of dollars lost by reason of the fact that those structures are allowed to fall into decay and not properly looked after, and if the engineer is made responsible for the condition of those

works lie will be called upon to say what repairs are required, look after them, report them and have the work done, and prevent such waste as< I have mentioned, and the responsibility of reporting as to what may be required for improvements of that kind would not 'be thrown upon the member.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: This is the first time 1 have ever heard the engineers criticised for not submitting reports to the department. I have not had time to read them all, I have tried to study up the items to some extent in preparing the estimates as printed. I think I am safe in saying that if I had incorporated in these estimates all the reports that have come from the engineers as to works that would ibe reasonably necessary I would have had a great many million dollars in the estimates that are not there to-day. I am always glad to have the advice of members as to necessary public works in their constituencies. I have tried to listen to every hon. gentleman who has had a suggestion to make, although, I am sorry to say, during the last week I have not been able to find time -for all who wished to see me, but in the future I wili be only too happy to listen to the recommendations of any member of the House. I want to assure members, however, that after I receive their recommendations I shall invariably ask the engineer for a report. I have sent out to all engineers in Canada a circular letter informing them that when I ask for information I want facts, and we will draw the conclusions in the office, and I intend to act upon those recommendations just as far as it is possible to do so.
This raises the question which I might as well discuss" for a moment. Under the present financial conditions, as I view them, it is simply impossible to obtain money to be expended on public works that can be allowed to stand for. two or three years. I dislike turning down a request for a public work in any portion of Canada, as much as any naan who ever occupied this position. I would like to be able to go on and build. I think I could build in a fairly economical manner, but until such time as the financial condition of the country is different from to-day I do not feel justified in spending money on any public work that is not actually necessary. And, unless I change my mind very much, I do not think I will spend very much money during this year or next, except on the class of work I refer to. ,1 realize that very nice questions arise as to what is necessarily a public work, and possibly there might be a very

sharp distinction between my definition of the term and the definition suggested by other people in Canada. When that occasion arises we will have to apply to the engineers and exercise the very best business principles which we are able to command, and I want to assure the House that any decisions at which we arrive will certainly be along business principles, and also in accordance with the policy of not spending one dollar which the public service of this country can get along fairly efficiently without spending.
Mr. M-cKENZIE:	The minister did not
hear me, or else he misunderstood what I said. I did not suggest for one minute that, as far as I was concerned, I was asking for any new public work.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I certainly did not intend to insinuate such a thing, and do not know why my hon. friend should have -taken such an inference from my remarks.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I refer to works which have been constructed which are allowed to fall into decay because they are not looked after. I find in- my county that engineers expected me to report to them, or expected me to report to the department where repairs -were necessary, and then the department would ask them to make a report. That has been the practice in. my part of the country. Somebody would tell m.e a wharf was out of repair, perhaps- the end was out of it, the 'ballast was falling out, and the wharf was going to pieces generally. I would report that to the minister, and he would ask the engineer to report on it. That was a roundabout way, causing delay and loss. I am saying to the -minister that the responsibility of seeing those works are kept in proper condition -should be on- the- engineer, and that 'means that he should acquire that knowledge and look after that. I did not refer necessarily to any new public work.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I think, on reflection, I did not answer that branch of my hon. friend's question. I quite agree with him that the duty should be placed upon the engineer in charge to make the necessary recommendation to the- department, and to see that the public works are kept in as reasonable a state of repair as possible, and it is 'certainly my intention in future to see that the engineers acquaint themselves with the conditions in their respective districts and keep the department properly advised. -


William Stevens Fielding: I would cordially commend the decision of the minister with respect to new works, and, for that matter, with respect to old works, if they are not of an urgent character. I notice in the estimates quite a number of items for repairs. I take it for granted they are necessary and proper. I would not like to assume that only those mentioned in the estimates are in need of repair. I think if my hon. friend will inquire of the engineers in the different parts of the country he will find there are many items which should be dealt with in the supplementary estimates. If I could think my hon. friend had them in mind, I should be quite content, but I should not like to assume for a moment that in the section of the country from which I come this list represents all repairs needed. I hope my hon. friend will ask the engineers of the district to report, not in regard to the ordinary repairs, but with regard to those really urgent, to prevent the works going into decay. I trust when the supplementary estimates come down works of that character will be provided for.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: This is a new phase of the question to me. I have never heard it presented in this way before. I have had some experience on both sides of the House, and I have myse'lf occasionally, I think, if I remember correctly, criticised over expenditures. I have not been in the habit, however, of inviting the Government to go on and make additional expenditures. Therefore, this is really a new situation to me. Notwithstanding the very earnest appeal made by the hon. member for Queens and Shelburne, I think if very high hopes are being built upon a long list of supplemental es, there are some disappointments in store for hon. members, because we have combed these items pretty carefully. We have reports from engineers as to requirements, and, as I said a little while ago, if we had to comply with all the requirements of the different engineers these estimates would contain a great many more millions, and while I do not say there will be no sup-plementaries, yet I do not want to hold out any alluring hopes that the list will be extensive.
speet of new works. I think new works almost of every kind might properly be postponed for the present, and I certainly would not ask my hon. friend to undertake to build any new works, unless the circumstances were extraordinary, and I do not anticipate that, but I know all over the country works are going into decay, and I have a shrewd suspicion that the main list which the hon. gentleman has in his estimates by no means covers the cases of the urgent and necessary repairs.
All I suggest is that my hon. friend shall obtain reports from the engineers. I do not want him to obtain them from the member for the county. I am not so familiar with the scheme which the hon. member for North Cape Breton suggests, but I think that in better days-and this is a policy which the Government might resume-we did not allow a member to dictate what was going to be done. We want the present Government to obtain from engineers and responsible officers in different parts of the country reports as to what repairs are necessary in order that the work already done may not go to decay. If it be a wasteful work, if it #is a work that should never have been constructed, let it go to decay, but if it is a useful work, let us try to keep it alive.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I have not gone over these estimates very accurately, but I think hon. gentlemen will find that there are general votes in practically all the estimates which can be used for necessary repairs to works of a small nature. That is the reason these votes are put in. If there are any places, such as have been referred to by the two hon. members from constituencies in Nova Scotia, where repairs are necessary, I will be very glad if they will give me the details.


Samuel Hughes: Get the engineers to give the details.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I will get the engineers to give the details too. We have reports from nearly every engineer in Canada.


William Stevens Fielding: Of recent date?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Yes, within the last four or five months they have all made reports.


William Stevens Fielding: I do not desire a long Mr. FIELDING: The reports upon which list of supplementary estimates. If we had estimates are prepared are generally sent such a list I should feel at liberty to criti- in quite a considerable time before the cise them, but I want to follow the line	estimates	are	made	up	and	by the	timetaken by the hon. gentleman from Cape	the estimates	reach	the	House very	oftenBreton and Victoria in regard to the main- there are later and other works which need tenance of works already in existence. I	attention.	That has	been my	experience inwould stand with the hon. minister in re-	the past.
Mr. OAiRVELL. I would be only too happy to give the matter my very best consideration, but I still think that provision has been made in these estimates for all really necessary repairs to public works.


Mr. PARENT :: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Carvell) referred this afternoon to 'the St. Charles River works at Quebec. These works have cost up to date about $1,300,000 *although they are not in a very advanced state. It is currently rumoured in the streets that if these works are not attended to right away they are bound to fall into a very bad condition with the result that the country will lose a very large amount of money. I would like my hon. friend to attend to this matter. II would suggest that he ask for a special report on these works. Probably he can find some means of getting the money through supplementary estimates, to provide for the carrying on of these works.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: While these do not
come under the civil list, I would be very glad to answer the hon. member (Mr. Parent) or any other hon. member, with regard to any public works in Canada. I did not personally visit the St. Charles River works but I have no hesitation in saying that the St. Charles River deve'opment works, if that is the proper name, are not essential public works in Canada to-d'ay. The work at that point was discontinued advisedly but every precaution has been taken to see that there shall be no deterioration in the portion of the work that has been constructed. We attempted to effect a settlement with the contractors. The larger portion of the money due them, including the deposit and drawback, has been returned to them. The balance is ready for them at any time. They are asking to be paid a certain amount of money on account of the closing down of the works. That is a matter under negotiation by the department and therefore I would not be justified in discussing the details of it.


Mr. FONTAINE (translation):: Mr. Chairman, will the minister state whether provision is -made in the estimates of the Public Works Department for repairs to the bridge called the Chaudiere bridge, between Hull and Ottawa. That bridge is in very bad condition. Care must be taken not to allow too heavy loads to be carried over it, and automobiles must reduce their speed to five miles an hour when crossing over it. 1 should like to know whether an

item has been put in the estimates for repairs to that bridge. It seems to me that such a work would come within the scope of urgent public works.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: In reply to my hon.
friend (Mr. Fontaine) I may say that he will find on page 73 of the estimates an item of $130,000 for a new bridge to replace the present Union bridge over the Ottawa river between Ottawa and Hull. That was voted in 1917-18. My hon. friend will see that the same amount is in the estimates to-day as a revote. I am not in a position to state to him exactly what the department will do about this very important matter but for fear that there should be -any misunderstanding about my attitude at least I want to say that I never could see by what reason the Dominion of Canada should build a bridge for the people of Ottawa and Hull across the Chaudiere falls. There may be some reason for it. Possibly there may have been some old arrangement; 1 do not think there was an agreement. I have been trying to investigate the matter. I can say to my hon. friend that negotiations are now under way between the Public Works Department and the provinces of Quebec and Ontario by which I hope provisions may be made for the reconstruction of this bridge. These negotiations have -reached pretty nearly the concluding point. Perhaps it would not he quite proper that I should state what they are until the -matter is finally settled, -but I have very [DOT]strong reasons for believing that an arrangement will be made toy which the bridge will be constructed, but not entirely at the expense of the Federal Government.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Mr. Chairman


The CHAIRMAN:: I beg to draw the attention of the committee to the fact that we are wandering very far away fro-m the item under discussion. I did not want to interrupt the hon. member for Hull (Mr. Fontaine) the first time he arose to speak in this House, hut in spite of the g-ood will of the hon. the Minister of Public Works I think I must courteously draw his attention to the fact that the item under consideration is salaries in the department and that we should not wander any further away from this item at the present time.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I was not wandering
because I had not begun to speak.


Georges Henri Boivin: I did not mention the hon. member (Mr. McKenzie).


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: When I wander it will he time enough for the Chairman to call

*me to order. I was just saying to the minister, juet to finish this wandering, that I understand it is a sort of conventional understanding in Canada that all interprovincial bridges are built, or at least assisted, by the Federal Government. I always thought that was the practice.


Samuel Hughes: In connection with the letting out of a number of the officers of the department, engineers and officers of one class and another, which the minister has referred to, might I make a suggestion? We have a new department, that of Immigration and Colonization. At the conclusion of the war there will be scope for measures of a great deal of usefulness to that department. From one end of the Dominion to the other there will be need for the building of roads, for the construction of railways, for systems of drainage, to open up the new parts of the Dominion in order to carry on the necessary works in Connection with colonization, upon which these officers could be employed. I should 'like to make this suggestion to the new Minister of Colonization-	<


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I accept that suggestion as being a very wise one. I may tell the hon. gentleman that a committee of the Government was formed something over two weeks ago which is now investigating the conditions of the Civil Service in all the different departments with the object in view of ascertaining how many officers, both in the Inside and Outside Services, will be available for just such work as my hon. friend has referred to.


Arthur Bliss Copp: My hon. friend referred to an Order in Council that had been passed some time ago in regard to appointments to the Outside Service, ,an order which must commend itself to every member of this House. Does that order refer only to his own department or to all departments of the Government?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: To all departments of the Government.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Will postmasters have to pass examinations?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: It means that postmasters will have to be appointed by the Civil Service Commission. I do not know what kind of an examination will be required. It does not necessarily mean an educational test, but an examination of fitness and character; and, I would say among all other things, the location of his place of residence or shop or whatever it may be. It will be
10*
an examination in order to see that he is properly qualified for the position-


Arthur Bliss Copp: In every particular.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I hope so.


An hon. MEMBER:: He would not have to be a man of letters, I suppose?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: If he can read the postcards, I suppose he will be satisfactory.
Department of External Affairs-
Salaries	$ 49,137 50
Contingencies	 15,500 00


Robert Laird Borden: The increase is due to the fact that a portion of the staff has been transferred to the Department of External Affairs from the Privy Council on account of the Prime Minister becoming Minister of External Affairs and relinquishing his position as President of the Privy Council.


Lucien Cannon: Will Sir Joseph Pope be the head of the department?


Robert Laird Borden: Yes.


Lucien Cannon: As he is now?


Robert Laird Borden: Yes.


Charles Murphy: There is an increase in the third division, sub-division A.


Robert Laird Borden: That increase is due to the transfer of a portion of the staff from the Privy Council to the External Affairs. When I went over to the Department of External Affairs I took them with me.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Does the Department of External Affairs publish an annual report?


Robert Laird Borden: Yes.
Department of Railways and Canals- Salaries, including Assistant to Minister at $5,00-0 ; Solicitor at $5,00-0 ; Inspecting Engineer at $4,000 ; Chief Auditor at $2,800-; Assistant Engineer at $2,800 ; C. E. Stevens at $2,100; R. Dorman at $1,800 ; J. H. Arthurs at $,6-00

Contingencies-$2-8,0 0-0.


Mr.  J. D. RETD@: In the details of this estimate, which appear on page 29, you will see that there is an increase to the assistant to the minister, Mr. G$aham Bell, from $4,500 to $5,000. There is also an increase to the Solicitor, Mr. Faifweather, from $4,500 to $5,000. In the first division, sub-division A, it would appear that there is an increase in the number of officials from 13 to 16. This does not really mean that we are increasing our staff. We are bringing in from the Outide Service Mr. Alexander Ferguson as Inspecting Engineer

at the same salary that he has been receiving. Then Mr. F. M. MacLellan, the Chief Auditor, is being promoted from the second division sub-division A. We are making provision in that class for a private secretary.


Rodolphe Lemieux: A private secretary to whom ?


John Dowsley Reid: To the Minister of Railways and Canals.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What became of Mr. Yates?


John Dowsley Reid: Mr. Yates is still in that class, although he is doing work in the Privy Council.
Mr. LEMIEUX. He is a very excellent official.


John Dowsley Reid: A splendid official.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Will the private secretary have to pass the Civil Service Commission?


John Dowsley Reid: No. In the first division, sub-division B, two additions are being made. They are Mr. R. H. Lang, Assistant Accountant, who was promoted, and Mr. C. E. Stevens, who has been brought in from the outside service.


Mr. MIQHAUD:: Is Mr. Stevens located at Moncton?


John Dowsley Reid: I cannot say at the moment. In the second division, subdivision A, we are promoting Mr. R. Dorman from $1,600 in subdivision B to $1,800 in subdivision A, and we are transferring Mr. J. H. Arthurs, auditor, from the Outside Service to the Inside Service. In second division B, there are. three vacancies which will not be filled, and in the third division A we are dropping one appointment. While it might appear that we have one .more official on the list than last.year, the staff is not really being increased; we are transferring some of our men from the Outside to the Inside Service.


Lucien Cannon: Does this item include
the staff working on the construction of telephones ?


John Dowsley Reid: No.


Lucien Cannon: Does not the minister's
department look .after the construction of the telephones?


John Dowsley Reid: No, the Department of Public Works.


Andrew Ross McMaster: Is the $500 increase to the assistant to the minister a statutory one?
[Mr. J. D. Reid.l
.Mr. REID: No.


Andrew Ross McMaster: Is the increase of $500 to the .solicitor statutory?


John Dowsley Reid: No.
Department of Customs-
Salaries	$ 361,775 00
Contingencies	 25,000 00


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: These are practically all
statutory increases with the exception of one.


Charles Murphy: What is the one in question? Is it a new position?


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: It has reference to my
private secretary.


Andrew Ross McMaster: Is the minister in a .position to tell us what amount was collected through Customs last year in comparison with the year (before, so that we can see what ratio of expense it took to collect the revenue that was collected by the department?


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: The amount collected was
considerably larger, and the estimates amount to exactly the same.
Department of Naval Service-
Salaries	? 20S.850 00
Contingencies	 50,000 00


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: The number of employees in the Naval Service is 139, an increase of six over the number provided for in 1917-18. The increase is to provide for the appointment first, of an officer in charge of the Western Division of Fisheries, and five extra stenographers; all, of course, subject to the approval of the Civil Service Commission. The others are the usual votes.


Charles Murphy: There are five increases in the first -division, subdivision B. Will the minister explain what they .are?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: There is an appropriation for the appointment of an assistant to the Superintendent of Fisheries, and two promotions in the tidal service, two in the Accounts Bratfch, and one in the Fisheries Branch.


Lucien Cannon: What does the item of $50,000 for contingencies cover?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: This item is the
same as last year and covers all items of office expenses, travelling expenses, stationery, printing, telegraph and telephone calls, and also any temporary clerks that are needed.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I notice for the first
time a new title, that of Deputy Minister and Controller. Will the minister please

tell us what ie 'meant by controller? What does he control?


Mr. BALL ANT  YNE@: 
Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The title may have
been there before, but I have never noticed it.


Lucien Cannon: Last year the employees of the Marine Department were subject to the recommendations of a committee, entitled, The Conservative Committee of Patronage. Hae the minister received of late any recommendations from that committee, and if so, have the recommendations (been considered?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: I am very glad- to
inform the hon. member that I have received no such recommendations, and>
if I had I certainly woulld not pay the least attention to them. While I have the honour of being Minister of Marine and Fisheries and of the Naval Service, I am going to administer this important portfolio to the best of my ability, and I do- not intend to recognize any patronage committees at all.


Lucien Cannon: I congratulate the minister upon that decision. We are evidently going to witness a change for the better.


Mr. POWER:: Will the same principle
apply to dismissals?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: Certainly.
Department of Inland Revenue-
Salaries	$ 190,02'5 00
Contingencies	 28,000 00


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: There is a small decrease in the number of clerks; 123 last year, and we are voting now for only 120.


Jacques Bureau: We have seen in the papers that the Department of Inland Revenue is to be merged in the Department of Customs. The member for Dorchester (Mr. Cannon) some time ago asked a question in the House in regard to this matter and the Prime Minister replied that he would make a statement shortly. Before we vote any moneys under the head of Inland Revenue we should know exactly what is proposed to be done with that department. If it is to he merged with the Department of -Customs, the committee should be informed what branch of the latter department will handle the work heretofore done by the Department of Inland Revenue.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: I am sorry that I cannot give full information, but I will give the hon. gentleman all that I have. At present I am acting-Minister of Inland Revenue. Nothing further than that has yet been -done. There is a Bill before the House in connection with changes in departments, and if Parliament passes that Bill, possibly something may be done along the line of merging the two departments. If there is a merging, it will be of the Customs and Inland Revenue Departments.


Jacques Bureau: The Bill before the House does not give much information. If it is the Bill that I have seen-and I suppose it is the Bill to which my hon. friend refers-the Governor in Council is given power to transfer one department to another or to make any change without the House having any knowledge of it and without Parliament first passing upon it. If the two departments are merged, does it mean that they will keep their identity while under one minister? Will the w-o-rk oif the deputy ministers be done by only one deputy mini-steT? We now have the Deputy Minister of Inland Revenue, and the Commissioner of Customs, which corresponds to the position o-f deputy minister. Surely the Bill which is before the House has not been introduced without some action being thought of or contemplated. There -must ibe some plan in the mind of the minister or of the Government -as to w'hat change is to he -made and how the merger is to be effected. I should like the details with regard to these points; they would help a good deal when the Bill to which my hon. friend has referred comes -before the House. Before I agree to give the Government the right to form a department or to change, combine, or create new departments, I want to -know exactly what these new departments are going to be. Heretofore all new departments have been created by the legislative power which at the time of the enactment knew what the authority of the department was to be, the scope of its activities, the officials to comprise it, and so on.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: I am sorry that it will not be possible to give an absolutely definite statement to-night as to what may happen with regard to a suggested union of two departments which it has not yet been decided to unite. I woulld think that after the passing of the- Bill would !be quite time enough to decide what officials in connection with the two departments would Ibe necessary. So far as the Inside Service of these departments is concerned, I would say that

it would be largely necessary to carry them on separately. They are distinct and separate classes of work, and, at this point at least, would have to he looked after by different classes of men. In a large number of places outside otf Ottawa, particularly in small districts, it might he possible to unite the work almost completely and to effect a considerable saving, or at least to secure greater efficiency by opening additional offices for the accommodation of the public with the same expenditure. Very large economies could he made in sofne places in *Canada and a better class of work done by the officials of both departments. If the amalgamation proceeds, it is along that line that the economies will take place and more satisfactory work in the interest of the community be done.


Ernest Lapointe: Will there he a private secretary in each department if the two departments are amalgamated?


Mr. SIFT  ON@: Xf the two departments
are under one minister I would not think it essential, but he would be apt to work at something else.


Ernest Lapointe: Who is the private secretary at present?


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: I have no idea.


Lucien Cannon: I was told this afternoon that the private secretary of the Minister of Inland Revenue was a gentleman by the name of Chass'-*, who receives a salary of $2,700. How can he draw a salary of $2,700? In the estimates of last year only $600 was voted for this purpose.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: A private secretary enters the department in one of the subdivisions of the Inside Service, and the $600 is voted separately and added to his salary so long as he remains private secretary. If his salary is $2,700, $2,100 is voted in one of these divisions and $600 as private secretary. If he ceases to be private secretary he goes back to' the other division at $2,100 and loses the $600.


Lucien Cannon: He would be occupying
two positions for which he would be receiving $2,700, $600 as private secretary and $2,100 for his work in the department?
v Mr. SIFTON:	No, he would he voted
$2,100 plus $600, 'but he would not be doing any work in the division while he was occupying his position as private secretary.


Lucien Cannon: Who is head of the department now?


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: Temporarily, I am.


Lucien Cannon: The former minister is
on leave?


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: I am not aware of that; I was appointed acting minister.


Lucien Cannon: Has he been given permanent leave?


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: Not to my knowledge.


Jacques Bureau: The minister, in speaking about the changes that are to be made in the department, says he is not exactly aware what changes are to take place. The minister says: When we get authority to do the thing, then we shall see what we shall do. My contention is that the minister should tell us what he is going to do before we decide whether we shall give the authority to do it or not. That is where the cleavage comes in between the minister and myself. I claim that the House of Commons ought to know exactly what it is legislating on. If changes are required to be made in the department, and we are to be asked to authorize those changes, we should know what things we are voting before we vote, and before we agree to this Bill, we ought to know exactly what the Bill means and what it is intended for. That is where the minister and I do not exactly agree.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: I would not like to disagree with the hon. member at all. My contention in regard to this was that it had nothing to do with these estimates, and that when the Prime Minister brought up the Bill and asked the House of Commons to pass it, then would be the proper time to find out what he meant by it. I have no doubt he will be able to give the House full information as to what it is for and what he would like to have done under it, but this has nothing at all to do with the salaries of the Inland Revenue Department, upon which, as far as is possible, I am willing to give all the information, and I am also willing to give information in regard to anything else that I know, but I cannot give any information in regard to what somebody else knows.
Mr- BUREAU: I thought the proper man to apply to was the minister who was at the head of or to be at the head of the particular department.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: The Prime Minister settles that.


Jacques Bureau: 
Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: Possibly he will do so.


Jacques Bureau: The Prime Minister would also probably accept the suggestions and recommendations of this particular head, because I suppose the Prime Minister has enough to do without being the active administrative head of each department of the service. I do not want to get into the confidence of the minister or to have him betray any secrets; but if this merger is going to take place under the authority of Parliament, I want to warn the minister if he is called upon to give any information, we shall endeavour to the best of our ability to exact this information from him if this Bill is going to be utilized to merge the Department of Inland Revenue with the Department of Customs.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Perhaps at a later
stage I shall ask the minister about this matter that I wish to speak about. I know of my own knowledge that in my constituency two preventive officers in the Inland Revenue Department have been dismissed. I have not been able to ascertain why they have been dismissed, but I was told by a very reputable gentleman from a part of the country where one of the officials was dismissed that since the dismissal illicit stills have sprung up in that place and a very undesirable condition has arisen.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: In Cape Breton?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I did not mention any place.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I should hope not.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: On the general principle that everything of a live nature is going on in Cape Breton, perhaps the hon. gentleman is right. I wish most seriously to call the attention of the minister to the matter. This officer was keeping down this sort of thing. The place is in an out-of-the-way part of the country, and I am told by this gentleman, who is the parish priest in this place, that the moment this man was dismissed, old troubles began, old stills were started up in the woods, and a condition of things brought about that is highly undesirable. I would ask the minister to inquire from his deputy in that department why those men were dismissed, and if it is his intention to keep some supervision over those districts by making other appointments.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: Will the hon. gentleman tell me the names of those men?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The man who was dismissed from the locality to which I referred was Donald McLellan. The name of the other man was John J. McKinnon, who was preventive officer in a part of the country quite distant from where Mr. McLellan is officiating. The part of the country where the trouble has arisen is where Mr. McLellan was officiating.


Lucien Cannon: The other day I asked the Prime Minister whether the two departments of Customs and Inland Revenue were to be merged, and the Prime Minister replied that in a few days he would give out a statement in regard to the matter. If such is the case, I do not think it is fair for the Government to ask the Opposition to vote this special item before the statement is given. Who is to administer this money? Who is to be responsible to the people? Who is to be responsible to the members of Parliament? We do not know. I do not think -there is any haste or hurry. Why not delay the item until the statement is given? Then we shall be in a better position to judge if the money is put into proper hands.
Civil Government-Department of Agriculture-
Salaries and contingencies....? 633,850 00


Mr. CRERAR:: The increase in salaries is due to the usual statutory increases. The other itern-s remain the same as they were last year.


Lucien Cannon: Would the minister say if there is a gentleman whose occupation is that of distributing bulls throughout the Dominion? Maybe the minister is not aware of this special niatter, but last year there was quite a discussion in this House on a most interesting subject, that of cattle distributed freely throughout the county of Dorchester, then represented by a minister in Sir Robert Borden's Cabinet. I would be very much interested, as being the successor of this hon. minister and also as residing in the same county, to know the name of the gentleman who made the distribution last year, what was his salary and how many bulls he distributed.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I regret that I cannot give the hon. gentleman the information he desires. I can assure him, however, that the item, if there is such an item, is not included in this list.
Department of Marine and Fisheries-
Salaries, including transfer of F. A. Willsher at $2,200, and of G. la. MacLaren and T. F.
Murdook at $1,450 each ....$224,500 00
Contingencies	 31,000 00

Mr. BUREAU. May I ask for an explanation about the transfer of Mr. Willsher and Mr. Murdock? Are they transferred from one branch to another?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: These three employees have been transferred from the Marine and Fisheries Department at Prescott to Ottawa, and we particularly need the services of these men now in connection with our shipping programme. They are expert draftsmen.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Does the principle apply to the department as regards the outside service, that all appointments will be made under the Civil Service Commission? I understand that the Harbour Commission of Montreal and the Harbour Commission of Quebec have certain appointments to make. Are these appointments subject to the Civil Service Commission?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: No. The Harbour Commissioners of Montreal and Quebei: have full jurisdiction in these matters.


Rodolphe Lemieux: They retain their own standing?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: Just as in the past.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I understand the position of Harbour Master of Quebec is vacant. I do not know if any recommendation has been made to the department through the Commission in Quebec, but, if none has been made, I would be pleased to recommend to my hon. friend the name of Capt. Bernier, the gentleman who has done so much for Canada, who has discovered new lands and planted the British flag in the northern regions of Baffin's Bay. I simply throw out the suggestion to my hon. friend.


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: No representation
or recommendation has been made by the Harbour Commission of Quebec, but when it is made I shall be most happy to take into consideration what the hon. member has said with regard to Capt. Bernier.


Samuel Hughes: I will not take the matter up to-night, but I suggest to the hon. minister that, on some .future occasion, he should take the House into his confidence in regard to the shipbuilding industry in Canada, and also in regard to the question of transhipping of fish in frozen compartments overseas.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I wish to bring to the notice of the minister that he has two deputies in his department, one in the Department otf Naval Affairs and the other in the Department of Marine and Fisheries. I observe that one of those deputies receives

$5,000 and the other $6,000. I observe in the estimates the items of the .Department of Agriculture appear on page 26 and items of the Department of Marine and Fisheries on page 27. The Deputy Minister of Agriculture gets $6,000, and the able and efficient Deputy of Marine and Fisheries receives $5,000. I should like to know from the 'minister why there is such a striking difference between those two men. I venture to think there is not a more efficient deputy in the whole outfit than the Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries-, and I cannot -see why he should not 'be -getting $6,000 as well as any other deputy in- the department.


Samuel Hughes: Include the Deputy Minister of Militia also. I -should like to say a word for the Deputy Minister of Militia. He is an excellent officer, and has worked for. many years at a salary of $5,000. I have always been endeavouring to have his salary increased to $6,000, but have never -succeeded.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I -should suggest to the ex-Minister of Militia and Defence that he will only get the crown of life by persisting to the end, and I should like to tell -him to continue to persist until the deputy minister gets $6,000. I hope the suggestion I make to the minister will be adopted, because the distinction is somewhat -striking, and might be regarded as odious, that one department is divided into two branches, and the head of the .more important branch only receives $5,000, while the head of the other gets $6,000. That requires some explanation.


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: It is very pleasing to hear the words of commendation that the hon. -member has been good enough to express in regard to Mr. John-ston, the most efficient deputy of the Department of Marine and Fisheries. I quite agree with all the hon. member has said, and, without committing any breach of confidence with my colleagues, I might say that I have been on various occasions fighting very strenuously to put the efficient and able Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries on the same footing as the efficient deputy in charge of the Naval Service.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Hear, hear.


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: But I find in my
brief experience in public life that the wheels of Government move slowly, and one cannot accomplish all th-at he sets out to do, and I am sorry that Mr. Johnston's salary does not stand at $6,000 instead of $5,000. I still have some hopes that before Parliament adjourns in some way or an-

other some suitable recognition of Mr. Johnston's services may be made. For the moment, I am' sorry the salary has to stand at $5,000, but I thank the hon. gentleman for what he has said. I cannot speak too highly of Mr. Johnston. He is a very efficient, loyal and painstaking officer.


Charles Murphy: In connection with the
officials transferred from the Outside to the Inside Service, what becomes of the positions vacated? Are the positions in the Outside Service to be filled or abolished?


Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne: I was not expecting the Civil Government estimates to come up to-night, and I could not get in touch with Mr. Johnston and I have not all the details I would like to have, but I should judge, inasmuch as the number of employees this year is 125, four less than last year, that the positions at Prescott are not being filled, but I will not give that as a positive answer.
I will furnish the information at some other time.


Charles Murphy: When the hon. minister mentions Prescott, he at once makes me suspicious. He has told me somthing I did not know, and I want to point out to [DOT] my hon. friend that there would be no indication in these estimates as to what becomes of the positions in the Outside Service to which I referred. These relate only to the Inside Service, and my inquiry is, what becomes of the positions in the Outside Service from which transfers have been made to the Inside Service?


John Dowsley Reid: My hon. friend need
not 'be much alarmed about Prescott. The only one in this list who comes from Prescott is Mr. T. F. Murdock. He was appointed to a position at Prescott probably eight or nine years ago. He is a very capable young man, and was transferred to Ottawa, promoted probably some three or four years ago. He is now being put on the Inside Service, and it is a promotion for him. He iwill get his statutory increase. He is a fine young man, bom in Prescott-
Mr. MoKENZIE: He could not help that,
I suppose.


John Dowsley Reid: and deserves every consideration.


Jacques Bureau: Do I understand from the minister that he was transferred some three or four years ago from the Inside Service to the Outside Service?


John Dowsley Reid: No, he was transferred from
the town of Prescott, where he was. employed in the Marine and Fisheries Department. The department here called him from Prescott and gave him. employment and promoted him. Now I see they are transferring him from the Outside Service to the Inside Service permanently.
General Consulting Engineer to Dominion Government-
Salaries	$ 7,600 07)
Contingencies	 150 00


John Dowsley Reid: This is an item that has been in the estimates for many years. This was to pay the salary of the late Sir Col-lingwood Schreiber $6,000, and his private secretary $1,600. I am sorry to say that Sir Collingwood Schreiber died two or three days ago. But his place will have to be filled and I would like to have this item remain in the estimates.


Charles Murphy: What is the minister's reason for saying that his place will likely have to be filled? What work will a successor to Sir Collingwood Schreiber he required to do?


John Dowsley Reid: In the Department of Railways and Canals they have always had a consulting engineer. Sir Collingwood Schreiber has filled that position for many years.


Charles Murphy: He was the first.


John Dowsley Reid: He was there for many years. There are more railways being added to the system and there will probably be a great deal more work to do. At all events I feel like leaving that item there in the meantime until we can consider the situation.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Will this come under the Civil Service Commission?


John Dowsley Reid: I presume so; they will
have to issue a certificate.


Charles Murphy: W]hy is this position necessary in view of the very excellent appointment made by the minister, according to the newspapers, of M-r. Gordon Grant, formerly engineer of the Transcontinental railway? He has been added, I understand, to the hon. gentleman's staff. Why does the minister want this item, if that is the case?


John Dowsley Reid: The hon. member, of course, is aware that Mr. Gordon Grant occupied the position of chief engineer of the Transcontinental railway. He has always been paid out o-f that vote. That vote may eventually cease. Then, of course, Mr. Grant's position would be ended. If I had an item of this kind in the estimates, and I found it necessary to have a consulting

engineeer, Mr. Grant might be used there or elsewhere; at all events, it has been necessary to have a consulting engineer. I believe that the increased work that will he necessary in the Railway Department on *-account of the increase in the railway systems to be attached to the department will necessitate the employment of a consulting engineer. For that reason I would ask that the item remain for the present year.


Charles Murphy: I do not understand the position as stated by the minister. My recollection of the statement in the newspapers is that the iton. gentleman had added three engineers to the staff. Mr. Gordon Grant was one, another was a railway and bridge engineer and there was another. Is that the fact?


John Dowsley Reid: I brought into the department a gentleman named Mr. A. E. Warren who was operating man on the Canadian Northern railway and who, from all I could hear previous to his coming in, was an excellent man. He has certainly done great work during the past winter in assisting in the operating of the railways.


Charles Murphy: What is his salary?


John Dowsley Reid: He has be&n an employee of the Canadian Northern railway, and he has not yet been transferred to the department. He is still being paid by the Canadian Northern railway. He has been general manager at Winnipeg. I intend getting him into the department because of the good work he has done. It will be necessary to have an expert operating man in the department because of the large addition to the Government railway system. Then I also have made arrangements to secure the services of Mr. Monserrat, who designed, and was chief engineer of, the Quebec bridge. He was the engineer in charge of the construction of the bridge. I think every hon. member will agree that Mr. Montserrat deserves every credit for the splendid work he did in connection with that work. Although the bridge is practically completed it has not been taken off the contractors hands. We are operating it.


Rodolphe Lemieux: It has not yet been accepted by the Government?


John Dowsley Reid: It has not yet been finally accepted. Mr. Monserrat's services would be dispensed with when the work was finally taken off the contractor's hands, which may possibly be within a few months! Mr. Monserrat called upon me and asked whether his services would be dispensed with immediately on taking the bridge off

the contractor's hands. He stated that when he accepted this position his intention was, when the work was through, to settle in Montreal and take up the work of a consulting engineer. He also said that when they built the bridge over the Clyde they thought it well to employ an engineer for a year to take notes and see if there were any deflections. Mr. Monserrat asked me if I would retain him for a year for that purpose- At times during the last year we used Mr. Monserrat in the several departments in cases of arbitrations. He is a very high class man. I asked him if he would come to Ottawa and assist us at Ottawa not only in the Department of Railways and Canals but in any department in so far as consulting or arbitration work was concerned, and also keep in touch with the Quebec bridge work during the coming year. Mr. Monserrat agreed to do that. Therefore we will have Mr. Monserrat's services at Ottawa during the time that it will not be necessary for him to spend on the Quebec bridge. I have increased the staff by these two men. I feel that I will have to get probably one or two of the best men that we can get in connection with the railway system right here in Ottawa because of the increase in the work resulting from the addition to the Government railway system. That is the situation so far as the Department of Railways is concerned.


Charles Murphy: What is Mr. Montserrat's salary?
Mr. J. D. REilD: He was paid $12,000 a year as Chief Engineer of the Quebec bridge, and I agreed with Mr. Monserrat that his salary would, of course, remain the same, at least while he is still in charge of the Quebec bridge. It was finally decided that it was not necessary to have a man of his experience and ability in that position after completion of the construction.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Might I ask the hon. minister what portion of the $7,600 is to be paid to Mr. Monserrat and what portion to the other gentleman?


John Dowsley Reid: There will be no portion of that amount granted to Mr. Monserrat. There is an item in the estimates for the Quebec bridge, to pay the final amounts that may be due, and Mr. Montserrat will be paid out of that vote. If I find that it' is necessary to have some other expert ir. the Railway Department this item would be used for that purpose entirely. If not, there will be no expenditure made in connection with it.


Georges Parent: Would the minister tell the House who is operating Quebec bridge now?


John Dowsley Reid: The Government Railway system is operating it, and as the hon. member knows, there is quite a large traffic over that bridge, both passengers and freight.


Georges Parent: I understand that the Government is allowing that traffic, although the bridge has not been accepted by the Government.


John Dowsley Reid: Yes.


Jacques Bureau: Is the Government paying any toll for using the bridge while it is still the property of the contractors, or has any specific arrangement of that kind been made?


John Dowsley Reid: We are simply taking it over.


Lucien Cannon: Do any railways pay toll?
THE CHAIRMAN: Order. The Quebec bridge is very faT from the item under consideration.


Frank S. Cahill: The minister states that he will require the services of another gentleman to replace the general consulting' engineer, because of some roads that they are taking over. Would he ibe good enough to tell us what roads are proposed to be taken over by the Department of Railways and Canals, and whether they are to be operated by the Minister of Railways. Also if the employees will come under the Civil Service Act, or if that will be a patronage outlet for the Government?


John Dowsley Reid: On the regular estimates of the department it is my custom to make a statement of the whole railway situation, and on those items I will be able to give the hon, memlber a full answer.


Frank S. Cahill: The question arises as to why this man should be appointed, and why this item should be voted, and the answer, apparently, is that the Government purposes taking over some railways.


John Dowsley Reid: Of Gourse, the hon. member was not in the House last year, but he has, no doubt, read the newspapers and knows that we have taken over the Canadian Northern system.


Frank S. Cahill: I have never seen any statements in the newspapers to the .effect that the railways were to ibe operated by the Railway Department.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: There is just one word I wish to say to the minister. I am always anxious that the minister should secure the very best talent that he can get for his department.


John Dowsley Reid: It is necessary.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I have always suggested that tihey should get big men, not only in the minister's department, but in all others, so that when anything unusual comes up, or any big business had to be done, they would not be obliged to run around the country looking fox men. But I would advise the minister to get the very best engineer that he can get, and to make him, not a consulting engineer, but his chief engineer, placing the other officials in their proper order under him. If he has a first class chief engineer iat the present time he does not require a consulting engineer at all. Let him make his best man his chief engineer, and put the others as subordinates under him.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. iMaclean the House adjourned at eleven p. m.
Tuesday, March 26, 1918.