Mr.  E. N.@: LEWIS (West Huron) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 13) respecting injuries to persons due to motor vehicles.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: Explain.


Mr. LEWIS.: Mr. Speaker, this Bill has reference to damage done on the highway by a vehicle which was not known at the time the Criminal Code was instituted. This is a vehicle which is under the complete control of the man who is managing it-the chauffeur-and in this respect differs from a vehicle drawn by horses. I refer to motor
vehicles. There is a precedent for the Bill I am now asking leave to introduce. I have a report here in which it is stated that the British parliament is alarmed at the destruction of life and at the damage to roads occasioned by motor vehicles. As part of the explanation of this Bill I would mention that while there was not one passenger killed on the railways of the United Kingdom in the years 1907 or 1908, there were 101 killed in New York alone by motor vehicles, and there were 5,616 motor accidents in the United Kingdom 248 of which were fatal. I have some expressions of opinions here from the newspapers with regard to this Bill and I shall hand them into ' Hansard' without taking up the time of the House in reading them'
Montreal Daily ' Witness,' Wednesday, May 5, 1909.
Highway Assault.
We have decisions by courts of competent jurisdiction that the person on foot has the right of way, at least upon recognized crossings. This is common law and common sense. As things stand the motor car is on the same level as the horse and vehicle before the law, but there is an essential difference; when a horse runs away there is some excuse for the frightened animal. The machine is guided in all its motions by human hands. The driver of it is, therefore, with few exceptions-for machines have been known to ' run amuck '- responsible for its conduct.
Toronto ' Saturday Night,' May 15, 1909.
Take warning, ye motorists. Get over the excessive speed habit. Be alive to the rights of the other fellow. Put yourself in the place of the farmer for a few moments. Look the problem square in the face from his view point, and then see if you do not curse the automobile speed fiend, as the farmer now curses him.
Big sentence for motorist-Gets from 1 to 20 years and $500 fine for killing child.
Seattle, Wash., June 14.-Guy C. Stratton, a prominent lumberman, whom a jury convicted of manslaughter on the charge of having run over and killed 7-year-old Henrietta Johnson, while speeding his automobile, has been sentenced by Judge Frater, of the Superior Court, to an intermediate term of from one to twenty years in the state penitentiary, and to pay a fine of $500.
This is the first conviction for manslaughter under the provision of the state automobile law. The defence gave notice of appeal.
The ' Globe,' Toronto, Wednesday, OetobeT 20, 1909.
The British parliament is considering the advisability of building special tracks for motor vehicles and separating the two kinds of road traffic. Roads constructed for ordinary vehicles are destroyed by the automobiles, and the two kinds of traffic require radically different methods of road building.

Confiscate the cars of wicked motorists-Duke of Northumberland advocates this plan-keep them for, say, six months.
London, Nov. 14.-I do not believe that you will ever get over the difficulties unless you have, for certain definite offences, the right to confiscate the car for so many months. The speaker was the Duke of Northumberland, and, in view of the road casualties we have again to record this week, his Grace's remarks would seem to have the fullest justification.
Clinton ' News-Record,' June 3, 1909-The Auto question not yet settled.
Seventy-seven persons were killed by automobiles in New York alone during the past twelve months.
The cause of many of these killings is found in the reckless driving of high-powered engines through crowded thoroughfares by men intoxicated either with the speed of motion or in. the ordinary way. Women, children and the aged should be free to go and come without fear of being run dowrn by an engine capable of travelling fifty miles an hour, and which may be in the hands of a drunken driver.-Sun.
The Auto Nuisance in England.
It is not. only in Ontario rural districts and villages that the auto has made a nuisance of itself. The same thing has occurred in England. As a result a petition to the Queen is now being signed for presentation by the women of English villages in the following terms:-
'We women of England humbly beseech your Majesty to help us to get some relief from the motor cars. We are sure Your Majesty cannot know how much we suffer from them. They have made our lives a misery. Our children are always in danger, our things are ruined by the dust, we cannot open our windows, our rest is spoiled by the noise all night. If they could be made to go slow through the villages it would be a great thing; but we are only poor people, and the great majority of those who use motor cars take no account of us. We do not know what to do, so we appeal to Your Majesty to use your great influence on our behalf.'
The ' Huron Expositor,' Seaforth, Friday, July 23, 1909.
The automobile, which is becoming more common every day, is still a terror to many travellers on the public highways with horse vehicles. Some of those in charge of these machines are commendably careful and considerate, and with such there is not much danger. Others, however, are just as reckless and inconsiderate and evidently seem to care little how much trouble or danger they occasion. These latter should be sharply looked after and severely punished. "We heartily agree with the Montreal ' Star ' when it says:	If
the owners and drivers of automobiles will not observe the common decencies of life while they are on the public roads, then the community must treat them like the dangerous criminals they make themselves, and let them see that the resources of society are not Mr. LEWIS.
yet exhausted in dealing with men who take their pleasure at other men's peril. We would arrest and send to prison a reckless fool who should fire a rifle down a public highway upon which vehicles and pedestrians might easily be, and there is no reason why we should deal more tenderly with those who charge down these same peopled highways with immense cars.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 14) respecting offensive weapons and capital offences.-Mr. Lewis.

Mr. J. H.: SINCLAIR (Guysboro) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 15) to amend the Canada Shipping Act.
Some lion. MEMBERS. Explain.


Mr. SINCLAIR.: The purpose of this Bill is to avoid the unnecessary inspection of Canadian ships. Under the present regulations Canadian ships are practically subject to two inspections each year. A ship has to be inspected by Lloyds' inspector in order to obtain qualification for insurance, and when she arrives in a Canadian port she is also subject to inspection by the Canadian government inspector. In England the Board of Trade accepts Lloyd's inspection as quite sufficient. Everybody knows that Lloyd's inspection is the best inspection in the world and that a second inspection is absolutely unnecessary if the ship holds a certificate from Lloyd's. This inspection is an expensive piece of business for the owner of the ship. It means the cooling down of the boilers, the cleaning out of the hold, the taking the coal out of the bunkers; it means that the ship may be several days in the dock, and it often costs thousands of dollars. As Lloyd's inspection is accepted by the British Board of Trade, and Great Britain being the greatest shipping country in the world, I see no reason whatever why Lloyd's inspection should not be accepted by the Canadan government. My Bill provides that a _ ship holding Lloyd's 'certificate of inspection, shall not during that 'year be subject to a second inspection by Canadian officials when she arrives in a Canadian port.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. SYDNEY FISHER (Minister of Agriculture) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 16) to amend the Seed Control Act.
Some Hon. MEMBERS.: Explain.


Mr. FISHER.: The use of alfalfa has become so general in the country that it is thought well to include alfalfa seed amongst the seeds to be affected by this Act. The Bill also provides for the inclusion of certain other seeds. There are some minor amendments to facilitate the working of the Act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

Hon.  G. P.@: GRAHAM (Minister of Railways) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 17) to authorize the government of Canada to acquire by lease lines of railways connecting with the government railways.


Mr. R. L. BORDEN.: Explain.


Mr. GRAHAM.: The object of this Bill, in short, is to give the minister power to enter into negotiations to lease any line or lines or part of a line that may be thought by the board of management to be of benefit to the Intercolonial railway. One provision of the Bill is that such railway must be leased on the report of the managing board, that it must be certified to by the chief engineer of the government as being in a safe and proper condition for operation, and that no such lease shall be operative until ratified by parliament?


Mr. J. D. REID.: Do I understand the minister to say that he can enter into a lease and practically purchase a railway without first submitting the lease for the approval of parliament?


George Perry Graham: Oh, no; the lease does not become operative until it is ratified by parliament.
Mr. J, D. REID. That is better.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

Hon.  W. S.@: SHARPE (North Ontario) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 18) to amend the Bank Act.


Mr. FIELDING.: Explain.


Mr. S. SHARPE.: The object of the Bill is to provide that all stock on which no dividend has been claimed for upwards of six years shall be transferred to the government as trustees; that dividends on that stock which have not been paid for upwards of six years shall also be transferred to the government as trustees, and that balances remaining unclaimed in a chartered bank for upwards of six years shall be transferred to the government as trustees. The Bill also provides that should
any person afterwards establish a legal right to these balances or to the stock the government will pay the accumulated interest at the rate of three per cent.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

Hon. GEO  P.@: GRAHAM moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 19) to amend the Intercolonial and Prince Edward Island Railways Employees' Provident Fund Act. He said: the object of this Bill is to reduce the time of service required before an employee of either of these lines is entitled, to be placed on the provident fund. During the past few months one of the strongest arguments made in favour of certain employees who have been dropped from the service has been that they were dropped just a short time before they would have been permitted to be placed on the provident fund, thus losing what they had paid in. This Bill is to obviate what might in a measure be an injustice to these old employees.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

Hon. GEO. E. FOSTER (North Toronto).: Before the orders of the day are called, I would like to ask the Prime Minister one or two questions with reference to the papers brought down as to the conference in London. In looking them over, it seems to me that they are incomplete. For instance, I was very anxious to find out what was the position taken by New Zealand and the position taken by Australia in reference to the provision that should be made for aiding in the imperial defence. I find nothing in the papers which gives any information as to that. The other day the Prime Minister spoke of what New Zealand and Australia were going to do and read an article from a newspaper. That, lie knows is not the best kind of information for us to go on. I supposed that when these papers came down, we would see accurately, as we see in the case of Canada, what. Australia and New Zealand proposed to do. It struck me that this paper was prepared for consumption in Canada, and therefore that the parts relating to Australia and New Zealand were not included. I may be wrong in that. The other point on which I would like to ask for further information, if it can be brought down, is this: I find that there are in that report allusions to the admiralty trying to meet, as far as they could, the wishes of Canada; but I do not find in these papers any expression of what the wishes of Canada were; and that is somewhat vital, I think, to an understand-

mg of the whole question. Are there not some lacunas which might be filled up?


Wilfrid Laurier: All the papers, as far as I know, and I think I am correctly informed, have been brought down, with the exception of the deliberations of the imperial conference So far as we are concerned, we have no objection to these being brought down, but I understand that objections come from other parties. The deliberations of the imperial conference, comprising all the self-governing dominions-New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and Canada-have not been given to the public.


George Eulas Foster: Then Australia and New Zealand will get information from the papers laid on the tables of their houses which we have not got?


Wilfrid Laurier: No. There was a separate conference with the admiralty by Australia and one by New Zealand.


Hon. L. P. BRODEUR (Minister of Marine _ and Fisheries).: We did not get permission to bring down the papers with regard to Australia and New Zealand. I suppose we might inquire from the imperial authorities whether there would be any objection to bringing down those papers. The papers brought down are those which have_ been sent here by thp imperial authorities. The proceedings of the imperial conference and the papers laid before the conference are secret, and cannot be brought down.


Robert Laird Borden: I understood that the papers already brought down were the proceedings of the conference. By the word proceedings, does the hon. gentleman mean the oral deliberations of the conference ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: These are not before us at all?


Wilfrid Laurier: No.


Air.   R.@: I,. BORDEN. The only things before us are some written documents put in on one side and on the other?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I may explain more fully the situation. There were, of course, in the conference some discussions, which, as may be seen from the papers, were private; and at the close of the conference it was decided that they should not be published, but should be kept secret. As a result of that decision, the papers laid before the conference and also the proceedings of the conference have not been brought down. It was understood that a statement should be made by the Prime Alinister of England and a synopsis or precis of the documents would be prepared by Air. FOSTER
the Colonial Office, and this has been brought down.


George Eulas Foster: If I may be allowed, I would like to get this matter clear. It seems to me that in these papers w'e get the general conclusions of the conference, and then we get the results of the modification of the general plan laid down as between Canada and the admiralty. It seems to me that New Zealand and Australia will look for, and will undoubtedly get, the same laid upon the tables of their houses of parliament. They are not secret documents. It is only supposed that we do not want to know anything about them, and therefore they were not included in what was sent to Canada. But it does seem to me that, as we are all colonies together, it is very important for us to know what position New Zealand and Australia have taken, and there would be not the slightest objection, I am sure, to our getting that information.


Wilfrid Laurier: Let me explain again that the conference was between the imperial government and the governments of the self-governing dominions. It was decided that the oral discussions should not be brought down. Then, there was a separate conference between the admiralty and Canada and offers between the admiralty and the other colonies. We brought 'down the papers relating to the conference with Canada. I understand that what my hon. friend wants is the papers relating to the conferences with Australia and New Zealand. We have no objection, and we will at once wire for them.


George Eulas Foster: Then, the recommendations of the Canadian government or the expression of their wishes, are entirely in the hands of the government here. Have they any objection to bringing these down?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I suppose it was in the discussion which took place at the conference.


George Eulas Foster: It might have been a memorandum.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, there was no memorandum prepared by the Canadian representatives. The only thing was some wishes which were expressed in the discussions before the conference.


John Dowsley Reid: From the return brought down, it is quite evident that the government have their scheme already prepared. Is it the intention to bring the Bill down at an early date or to hold it over until after the holidays?


Wilfrid Laurier: We intend to bring it down at an early date.
Air. R, L. BORDEN. There is a good deal of inquiry for the report. I do not know

how many copies have been prepared, but I would suggest that a sufficient number of copies should be prepared to have it generally available.


Wilfrid Laurier: I think two thousand copies have been prepared, but I shall speak to the Secretary of State about that.



REPORT PRESENTED.

[Stage Direction]
Supplementary report' of the International Waterways Commission, 1909.-Sir Wilfrid Laurier.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee on the following proposed resolution :
Resolved, that it is expedient to pass an Act to prevent the introduction or spreading of insects, pests and diseases destructive to vegetation; providing for the granting of compensation for matter destroyed for this purpose, the appointment of inspectors for the enforcement of the Act, and penalties for its contravention.-Mr. Fisher.
Sydney Arthur Fisher: The object of the Bill to be founded on this resolution is to provide against the introduction into Canada of various insect pests which are prevalent in other countries but from which, so far, we in Canada have been fortunately free. It is also intended to provide that where insect pests or infectious diseases exist in Canada precautions may be taken to prevent their spread. The House will remember that we have in Canada an Act known as the San Jose Scale Act, which was adopted by this parliament some seven or eight years ago for the purpose of protecting this country against the introduction of that well known pest. That Act was aimed simply at the introduction of the pest from abroad and provision was made at first for the absolute prohibition of the importation of vegetable matter, trees or shrubs, from countries infested with the San Jose scale. Afterwards provision was made for the importation of such things from those countries under conditions which would still protect this country. That Act has worked very well and from its inception until to-day we have been able to trace no instance of the existence of San Jose scale in Canada to an importation from abroad. Unfortunately before the Act was passed there was a little San Jose scale in Canada.
Last spring we were informed of the existence of an insect pest in France commonly called the brown tailed moth. We were informed that shipments of nursery stock were coming to this country which were infested with the eggs of that very injurious insect. We had no power to deal
with the matter. We, however, took what precautions we could and owing to the information obtained from the Customs and from shippers we were able to find out where the importations of nursery stock from France were coming in, and with the co-operation of importers we were able to examine something like 1,500,000 stock obtained from France and on that we found a very considerable number of the eggs of that insect, probably, in the aggregate, millions .of eggs, and these, with the concurrence and the forbearance of the owners, we were .able to destroy. There was, however, at first, a very decided objection on the part of the importers to having their stock examined, delayed or destroyed. I must say that they acted with great consideration and public spirit after they were impressed with the dangers existing and the importance of the work. Still, at any time any one of those importers would have been quite within his rights in refusing to permit the action of our entomologists.
Under these circumstances it seemed necessary to provide a further. safeguard to the orchardists and fruit growers of Canada and to the people generally who have, property that might be injured in this way. I therefore examined the cognate legislation in other countries and in the provinces of Canada. I found that in British Columbia they have an Act in very good form which has been in operation for some time, I think, very successfully. In Ontario they have two Acts, one aimed directly at the San Jose scale and anotheT more general Act which provides for certain precautions or regulations but comparatively little advantage has been taken of these Acts. In Nova Scotia there is an Act on a very small scale. In many of the American states there are Acts of this character, but I do not think there is any Federal law in the United States. They have experienced difficulties there owing to the Acts being State and not Federal Acts. In Great Britain a good many years ago, I think in 1887, an Act was passed to protect Great Britain against the ravages of the potato beetle, and quite recently, I think in 1907, a general Act very much of the same character as I am now proposing was passed in Great Britain to protect that country against the dangers from which I am now proposing to try to protect Canada. The present Act follows largely the lines of the British Act, giving power to the department to make investigations and to the Governor in Council to pass regulations dealing with the niceties of the case. Hon. gentlemen who are familiar with entomology or the insect diseases and pests which attack our agricultural products well know that the character of the pests varies greatly and therefore the treatment that would be required to guard against one pest would be quite different from that required

in the case of another, and consequently the regulations dealing with |any particular danger or menace would have to vary according to the character of the danger. Under these circumstances I find it impossible to embody in the Act the details of regulations. I have therefore found it necessary, as it has been found necessary in Great Britain and other countries where Acts of this kind are on the statute-book, to ask for authority to deal with each individual outbreak or menace by regulation made by order in council at the time, without waiting for special legislation in regard to it. This is the substance of the Act and the reason for it; I can give more detailed explanations when the Bill itself is under consideration.


Mr. MARTIN BURRELL.: I understand that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Fisher) is aiming at two things-first the prevention of the import of these pests and the other power to deal with these pests within the limits of the Dominion. Do I understand that he will specify the pests under order in council?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes.


Martin Burrell: Of course, the hon. minister is thoroughly familiar with the various legislative and administrative efforts in this same direction which have been made by the provinces. I take it that he agrees that the provincial and Dominion powers in these matters are concurrent. And I suppose he has tried to avoid any clash with the legislation already existing and the administrative steps already taken by the provinces to safeguard the interests of their own people in this matter. May I suggest that those interested in the various provinces be given an opportunity to examine the details of the Bill before it becomes law.


Mr. J. E. ARMSTRONG.: I would ask the Minister of Agriculture whether this Bill would conflict with the measures passed by the local legislatures of any of the provinces ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: There is no such intention. I said, in the remarks I have just made, that there were laws on this subject in British Columbia and Ontario. I shall be very sorry indeed to have any clash with the working of those Acts. There is no doubt that, under our constitution, there is concurrent jurisdiction between the provinces and the Dominion on these subjects And there is certain work which can be done better under a Dominion law, because that law applies to all the provinces, whereas' each provincial Act covers only the territory of the province by whose legislature it is passed. In the working of this Act. I should be disposed to be very careful not to overlook the operation of any provincial Mr. FISHER.
Act and certainly not to clash with anything in those Acts that tends to the accomplishment of the general object sought. I think that in every province the people will be quite aware of the danger of the spread of pests of this kind from one province to another, which spread can only be dealt with by a federal law. I would say, in answer to the hon. member for Yale Cariboo (Mr. Burrell) that the Bill is ready, and I propose to introduce it to-day on the passage of this resolution. It can then be printed, and I will not proceed with it until members have had an opportunity to examine it, and, if necessary, to communicate with those whom they desire to consult concerning it. At the same time, I would like to have it pushed forward as rapidly as possible consistent with the public interest.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Why not add a clause dealing with foul seeds?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: That is another Act altogether, the Seed Control Act.
Resolution reported, read the first and second times and agreed to.
Mr. FISHER moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 20) to prevent the introduction or spreading of insects, pests and diseases destructive to vegetation.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

['Yes, that is the statutory salary. As to the other items, I may say that there is no change whatever in the staff of the Supreme Court, except the statutory increases. In the Court of Exchequer an additional clerk is asked for. That clerk, the registrar says, the business of the court requires. He is to do the work of a stenographer, as the present staff of the court is not able to cope with that work without the aid from time to time of stenographers who are employed for temporary purposes. The salary of the new clerk, which it is proposed should be $2,100, is the lowest that an efficient man can be obtained for, and it-will be, perhaps not in whole Mr. CROCKET.\nbut in large part, met by the charges for copies of evidence, which are paid for by litigants before the court. .\nSome resolutions reported.\nOn motion of Mr. Paterson, House adjourned at 9.35 p.m.', 'Monday, November 22, 1909.']
Hon.  W. S.@: FIELDING (Minister of Finance) moved that the House go into Committee of Supply.


George Eulas Foster: Before you leave the Chair, Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a few remarks on the subject of the civil government expenses, which, I understand, it is proposed to take up to-day. I was talking not long ago with a very intelligent man, who takes as deep and continuous an interest in the public affairs of this country, probably, as any other man in it, and, in looking over some figures of our expenditures, or rather estimates of expenditure as set forth in the main estimates, and contrasting them with the expenditures of previous years, he made the statement that he would not have believed it to be true were it not before him in a most incontrovertible way. That is, he expressed his utter astonishment that expenditures in these lines had gone to the limit to which they have. I believe that this is by no means an isolated case. I believe that the people of this country, for whatever reason, have not any adequate idea, in the first place, of the extraordinary large dimensions to which these expenditures have grown, or in the second place of the extraordinarily rapid rate at which these expen-

ditures have increased. It may be that the members of His Majesty's opposition are at fault for not having put these matters before the people. Certainly, some things are different now from what thew were before. While we were in government and the party on that side were in opposition, every Liberal and Grit paper, large and small, printed repeatedly in large letters, kept constantly before the people, the increasing expenditures of the country, until, by daily repetition, by almost hourly reveiw, the people had it impressed upon them that there was a dangerously large expenditure and a dangerously rapid increase in that expenditure. But that large and influential portion of the press is to-day absolutely, or almost absolutely, silent with regard to the growing expenditure of Canada. There are no more large headlines in these papers, no more reiterated expressions in large figures and bold-faced type warning the people of danger, notwithstanding the rapid increase of expenditure that is taking place. Our own press-I mean by that the press that generally voices the opinion of :he Liberal-Conservative party may have failed in this respect, as we as members of this House may have failed, and that may be a good reason why the country as a whole is not alarmed.
The great convention of 1893 made a unanimous proclamation that they viewed with alarm the large and growing expenditures of the country, and the rapidly increasing debt of the country. To-day the people do not seem to be alarmed. That condition is not prevalent in the country, it seems, and my view of it is that the people, in a time of comparative prosperity and of large dealings, have had their minds more upon their own business than upon the business transacted under the administration of the Dominion government, and consequently have not taken time to inform themselves with respect to this matter. Well, I think it is the part of His Majesty's opposition in this House, partly, outside the House more than in it, and of the press which is favourable to our view of the question, to see to it that these expenditures are brought before the people, that they are understood by the people, and then, if the people absolutely desire that that shall be the rule, why the people are the arbiters in the final decision of the question. And so I am going to take up this matter of civil government expenditures, and just for a moment place two or three facts before the House in the hope that they will get to the country, that they may form an impression, and that at least the minds of the people shall be directed to what is going on so that they may form their own conclusions whether they consider it to be proper expenditure or not.
When these gentlemen sitting opposite were in opposition, there was nothing about
which they thundered and volleyed with more persistence and vehemence than the increase and quantity of the expenditures upon the different services of the country. If there was one subject more than another to which they paid especial attention, it was the item of civil government expenditures. They talked about the number of people that filled the corridors and were placed in the offices in the city of Ottawa; they talked about the extravagant salaries that were paid; they talked about the useless men and women that were employed, and they made it a strong point that if they came into power they would reduce this civil government expenditure, they would root out the useless officers, and they would put in just a sufficient number to carry on the work, and that they would effect notable economies.
Now what has happened? In 1883-4, civil government cost this country $1,084,417; thirteen years afterwards, in 1895-6, when the Liberal-Conservative government went out of power, civil government cost this country $1,396,628, an increase of $312,211, or a little over thirty per cent; thirteen years afterwards, in 1907-8, civil government cost this country $2,088,416, an increase of $691,788, or a little over fifty per cent. In 1908-9, civil government cost $3,283,265; in 1909-10, it cost, according to the estimates, $4,537,074; in 1910-11, civil government costs according to the estimates, $4,703,707.
Now I say it is absolutely startling that on this hill, and surrounding it, for civil government alone, nearly $5,000,000 is taken #out of the taxpayer's contribution that he has to lay before the government each year for the expenditures of this country. No man can convince me that it is necessary that $5,000,000, or anything near it, should be spent in order to get a fair and effective service in the offices and departments here in Ottawa. It is absolutely unthinkable that such is 'necessary, or that such ought to be the case.
Now, I want to be absolutely fair. In 1908-9 there were seven months in 'which the civil government estimates bulked larger, because a number of those that had been employed and paid out of contingencies in the different departments were brought into the civil service, and after September 1, 1908, went then into the civil government list. That makes it somewhat larger. But I purposely took the year before that, when no such translation had taken place, and showed that at that time there had been the large increase up to $2,088,416, while from 1908-9 when the Civil Service Act was in force throughout the whole year, the increase is a startling one. In 1908-9. $3,283,000; in 1909-10, under the same conditions, $4,538,000; in 1910-11, under the same conditions, $4,703,407, an

increase in this last year of pretty nearly $160,000.
Now that is a statement which I think ought to make even ministers thoughtful; it ought to make, every good citizen who believes in economical administration thoughtful. But when you take into consideration with that the increase of the expenditures in every other department, brought up last year to $127,000,000, whereas in 1896 it was about $41,000,000, those things all put together, I think, ought to give pause to the business people of this country, and to every good citizen, and at least ought to set him thinking.
Here, is a list of civil government expenditures as provided for in the estimates for 1910-11:
CIVIL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES. Estimates for 1910-1911
		$	$
Gov. Gen's. Seety	14	20,000	40,600Privy Council	20	35,137	7,400Justice	53	103,498	11,000Militia	98	127,000	10,000Sect'y State	34	56,412	9.000Printing and Stationery	70	86,648	7.300Interior	722	876,886	47,000Indians	75	111,825	12,550N. W. M. Police	n	18,425	900Auditor General.	79	103,200	5,000Finance	92	113,500	12,000Customs	182	244,975	10,500Inland Revenue	69	100.912	8,000Agriculture	274	359,175	13,500Marine and Fisheries..	175	250,150	30,000Railways and Canals..	89	130,187	15,000Public Works	243	358,537	15,500Mines	103	174,689	Post Office	505	546,260	64,800Trade and Commerce..	34	44,887	21,500Labour	23	32,300	12,000Supt. Insurance	15	18,750	11,300All of which is, of	course	, supported by	the insurance companies.	$	$


Consulting Engineer.   ..@: 2	7,300	700Lxternal Affairs	9	14,875	3,500


Consulting Engineer.   ..@: 8	12,950	
C. S. Comm		10	18,675	13,500
Depts. Generally				54,000
Totals at Ottawa	2,909	3,966,757	436,950High Comm's. Office	6	11,350	21,280Grand totals	2,915	3,978,107	458,230In all	Add Ministers and Governors	
267,066
Grand total	 $4,703,403
and I do not wish to add anything in the way of comment except to make a plain presentment of this one single branch of government expenditure. Take into account the necessary increase owing to increased business, take into account, if you like, the increased salaries which came into vogue in 1908, take into account the progress of the country and when you have done all that there still is a mighty big margin of, I believe, absolutely unnecessary and wasteful expenditure which is taking place under the shadow of this parliament on the hill at Ottawa in the departments. There is a way by which thii may be tested. I challenge the government to test it. They have appointed their own Civil Service Commission, men of their own choosing; there is authority in the Civil Service Act to authorize the Civil Service Commission to make an inquiry into the different departments and report as to whether they are sufficiently manned, or over-manned and whether the services rendered are equal to the salaries that are paid. This then can be tested. Let the ministry avail themselves of the power which they have in the Act and at least give to the people in the country, even though it be through officers appointed by themselves and consequently supposed to be favourable to themselves, a little chance to know whether or not they are paying too much for the work which goes- on on the hill at Ottawa.


William Stevens Fielding: Mr. Speaker, I do not think that my hon. friend (Mr. Foster) ever need accuse himself of any lack of duty in the matter of calling attention to the increase in the expenditures of this government. I want to do him the justice, if it be justice, to say that in every session when he has been amongst us he has discharged that duty. The only difference that I can recall is that in previous sessions my hon. friend has deferred his arraignment until the close of the session while this time he has been good enough to give it to us at the beginning, which perhaps will make for the expediting of public business and I have no fault to find with him on that score. My hon. friend, while referring particularly to the civil service has generalized with regard to the increased expenditure of the country. I would only remind him that some changes have come over the condition of the country during the period to which he has referred. He refers to the expenditure on the civil service in 1883 and then he points out what the increase had been down to 1895. He says that it had been some thirty per cent. Then he compares it with the very large increase of recent years. Well, we cannot very well challenge the accuracy of my hon. friend's figures, but it appears to me that
I do nr, think that needs any comment Me. FOSTER,

there are some other things which he ought fairly to have introduced into the discussion.
Now, the business of the country may be measured in various ways. The revenue of the country is one measure, and increased revenue means increased cost of collection. Increased revenue is usually followed by increased expenditure and increased expenditure involves increased cost of management in every department of the government. Had my hon. friend looked at it from that point of view he would be obliged to tell us that in the year ending the 30th June, 1883, the revenue of the country was thirty-five and three-quarter millions, that in the year ending the 30th June, 1905, the revenue had actually fallen short and the country was making no progress. It was a period of comparative stagnation, and so for the year ending the 30th June, 1895, the revenue was less that $34,000,000 and the highest revenue of any of the years my hon. friend cited was about $38,000,000. If my hon. friend is going to make comparison as between two periods, one period showing stagnation all along the line, a period when . the Northwest territories were not being filled as they are to-day, a period when little or no growth was taking place in Canada, then my hon. friend should have told us of these conditions and compared them with the prosperous conditions of the country when the revenue has grown to more than $96,000,000. My hon. friend (Mr. Fisher) reminds me that according to the hon. gentleman's own statement his government increased the expenditure of the civil service more than 30 per cent at a time when the country was- in a condition of stagnation. While it is true that we have increased the expenditure we have increased it only to meet the expansion of the business of the country. I am quite sure that upon careful examination it will be found that the expenditure has only kept pace with the growing needs of Canada. Then, turning from the civil service the hon. gentleman made reference to the general expenditure, I would remind him that while he and hon. gentlemen opposite are ready to condemn the increased expenditure generally, yet when you come to deal with matters of detail, with very rare exceptions the cry of gentlemen opposite is not for less expenditure but for more. They are very human on that side of the House. Some hon. gentleman who sits on the Speaker's left, goes home to his constituents and he discovers that in this growing time the post office accommodation in his town is insufficient, and he comes back to this House and he is quite as ready as any Liberal to say it is time that a new' post office should be built.


Mr. SCHAFFNER.: They cannot get it though.


William Stevens Fielding: They get it in many cases. Never wras there a time in the history of this parliament when the opposition were so well treated in the matter of public expenditures as they are to-day. Why, Sir, it is a matter of notoriety that in the days when the Conservatives were in power the counties wdiich did not return supporters to them could get little or nothing. We know that by our experiences in the eastern provinces. But, in the estimates now on the table of the House it will be found that .constituencies that do not support the government are treated most generously and liberally, and that the needs of the public are considered without reference to the question of politics at all. There is only one way to consider the question of the expenditures of civil government and that is to take each department on its own merits. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) speaks of the enormous increase that has been made to the staff of the Interior Department. We grant there has been an increase there but we say that it measures the expansion of Canada in the northwest. Would the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) compare the cost of managing the Interior Department to-day, with its abundant revenue, with the tremendous immigration coming into the country; would he compare it for one moment with the Department of the Interior in the days of stagnation when the Conservatives were in power? If he looks at it in that light I am sure that his sense of fairness will compel him to admit that there is just cause for the very large increase in the public expenditure in re-lato-n to the civil service. I do not know the details respecting every department of government ; but I am not prepared to say that the hon. gentleman can find of no instance where a department is over-manned. There are many departments in which you have old officials, men who have served the country rvell in their day and generation, but who to-day are not able to do very much work. We. from a sense of fairness and in appreciation of the services rendered by these old employees retain them in the service when we are not able to get as much work out of them as we would out of younger men. Probably my hon. friend could find that here and there he could economize by getting rid of those old and faithful servants, but I think the hon. gentleman himself v7ould rather bear the responsibility of some enlargement of the expenditure in this respect than treat these old officials in a harsh way. There is another thought, and that is that the hon. gentlemen on the opposite side of the House are generally disposed to increase the expenditure on the civil service rather than to reduce it, because wp frequently
2X9

have had complaints from them that the public officials are not sufficiently paid, and I know of no proposal to increase the salaries of civil servants at Ottawa that was not warmly advocated by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) or by those who sit near him. It is rather too late to arraign the government for this large expenditure on the civil service, unless we are prepared to take due account of the tremendous change that has come over Canada; of the enormously increased public business, of the great increase in our revenue, and the thousand and one things which devolve upon the government to-day and which did not devolve upon the government of some few years since. When the people take into consideration not merely the increased expenditure but the increased business and the increased prosperity of Canada, the conclusion I believe will he reached by them that we have been simply keeping pace with the growth of the country.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the House went into Committee of Supply.
Department of Agriculture-Salaries (including George F. O'Halloran) $6,000, $359,175.
['They get it in many cases. Never wras there a time in the history of this parliament when the opposition were so well treated in the matter of public expenditures as they are to-day. Why, Sir, it is a matter of notoriety that in the days when the Conservatives were in power the counties wdiich did not return supporters to them could get little or nothing. We know that by our experiences in the eastern provinces. But, in the estimates now on the table of the House it will be found that .constituencies that do not support the government are treated most generously and liberally, and that the needs of the public are considered without reference to the question of politics at all. There is only one way to consider the question of the expenditures of civil government and that is to take each department on its own merits. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) speaks of the enormous increase that has been made to the staff of the Interior Department. We grant there has been an increase there but we say that it measures the expansion of Canada in the northwest. Would the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) compare the cost of managing the Interior Department to-day, with its abundant revenue, with the tremendous immigration coming into the country; would he compare it for one moment with the Department of the Interior in the days of stagnation when the Conservatives were in power? If he looks at it in that light I am sure that his sense of fairness will compel him to admit that there is just cause for the very large increase in the public expenditure in re-lato-n to the civil service. I do not know the details respecting every department of government ; but I am not prepared to say that the hon. gentleman can find of no instance where a department is over-manned. There are many departments in which you have old officials, men who have served the country rvell in their day and generation, but who to-day are not able to do very much work. We. from a sense of fairness and in appreciation of the services rendered by these old employees retain them in the service when we are not able to get as much work out of them as we would out of younger men. Probably my hon. friend could find that here and there he could economize by getting rid of those old and faithful servants, but I think the hon. gentleman himself v7ould rather bear the responsibility of some enlargement of the expenditure in this respect than treat these old officials in a harsh way. There is another thought, and that is that the hon. gentlemen on the opposite side of the House are generally disposed to increase the expenditure on the civil service rather than to reduce it, because wp frequently\n2X9', 'have had complaints from them that the public officials are not sufficiently paid, and I know of no proposal to increase the salaries of civil servants at Ottawa that was not warmly advocated by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) or by those who sit near him. It is rather too late to arraign the government for this large expenditure on the civil service, unless we are prepared to take due account of the tremendous change that has come over Canada; of the enormously increased public business, of the great increase in our revenue, and the thousand and one things which devolve upon the government to-day and which did not devolve upon the government of some few years since. When the people take into consideration not merely the increased expenditure but the increased business and the increased prosperity of Canada, the conclusion I believe will he reached by them that we have been simply keeping pace with the growth of the country.']
Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Does this include payment for those who will be engaged in the census ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: It includes an additional vote for the extra labour entailed in Ottawa in the coming year. I will possibly have to get an amendment of the Civil Service Act to enable me to employ extra help of a temporary character in the city of Ottawa. The extra work on the census -will not commence in the city of Ottawa until well on in the coming fiscal year. This, of course, does not include any work done outside the city of Ottawa. Under the present Civil Service Act I cannot employ temporary clerks for work of that kind for more than a few months in the year. When the staff comes to be formed for the compilation of the census, it may be requisite to employ a number of extra clerks in the city of Ottawa for one or two years. To enable me to do this, there will have to be an amendment made to the Civil Service Act or to the Census Act.


George Eulas Foster: I notice that there is provided for here an additional clerk in the first division, subdivision A.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: In the organization of the department I find that I shall have to have certain work in the department, which is increasing very materially, done under an officer who will have responsibilities and duties which will justify his being placed in that position.


George Eulas Foster: What is the work?


William Stevens Fielding: 


Sydney Arthur Fisher: First of >all, dealing with the correspondence and other matters connected with the International Institute of Agriculture in Rome, obtaining information regarding Canada for that institute, and receiving and dealing with the information procured from that institute for the service of the people of this country. It is proposed that that same officer shall have charge of the correspondence of the department, which is at present under the special charge of the office of the deputy minister. There is also the question of the distribution of the hundreds of thousands of documents sent out from the department. These are now being sent out from the different branches, and there is a duplication, which is unnecessary and adds to the expense. I think one officer ought to^have charge of that. There are also other details which have not been worked out.


George Eulas Foster: It does not seem to me that the minister has made a very good case for having a $2,800 to $4,000 man for that work. What is it that we send to or ge<t from (the International Association? I suppose that it is certain kinds of information that all the countries connected with it send. I notice that generally some person goes to it, and his expenses are paid by the country. What would it be necessary for this man to do with reference to that?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: The object of the institute is to collect information, chiefly on agricultural and statistical subjects, from the different countries which adhere to it, and file it in the office of the institute, so that it will be available to the various countries in a concise and complete form. That will be done in Rome by the staff there.


George Eulas Foster: That you do not pay for?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: No. The information sent from Canada to Rome-all kinds of information with regard to statistics, the reports of various departments, the work of the different provinces, and the agricultural development of the country-has all to be prepared and sent forward. There has to be constant communication between the headquarters of the institute in Rome and this country.


George Eulas Foster: It is statistical information?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Largely statistical, but scattered through a very large number of publications in Canada, and obtained, from many sources. As a matter of fact, the work in Rome is all done in the French language, while a great deal of this statistical information in Canada is obtained from English sources. The work is very considerable, much larger than I expected,

and it will no doubt increase in the future. At the same time, I think it is a necessary and very useful work, and we shall get a direct return in the information of the same character which we shall receive from other countries, and which, if we vrere not a member of the institute, we would not get. The work as yet has not been thoroughly established. We have not been receiving any information, although we have been sending large quantities of . information. There is a great deal of correspondence, which comes to us altogether in the French language, and this has to be dealt -with here by somebody who understands that language.


George Eulas Foster: It is plain to me, from what the minister says, that any bright business man with an aptitude for figures, could gather and collate that information. It is not necessary to have a $4,000 man for that or for receiving the correspondence from Rome. It is not expert correspondence, but only clerical. If the minister desired to be economical, it seems to me that he could get a man to do that in a class lower than the highest class in the service. For instance, I think you could get a man in the class from $1,600 to $2,100 who would do that and do it excellently. A man who would know French would probably be of French descent. I do not think it is impossible to get a man at that price, but even if it was, could you not get one in the class from $2,100 to $2,800? Why should it be necessary to appoint a man of the very highest class who, -within a few years, will be getting $4,000? It does not seem reasonable to me.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: My hon. friend minimizes both the value and the difficulties of this work and also ignores the other work that will be given into the charge of that officer. He will have other duties and will have to direct and control the lower officials in charge of the work. He will have a considerable staff under his guidance and under these circumstances it is right to appoint an officer of this class. It is true that in the course of time he will reach $4,000, the maximum of his class, but he wall begin at $2,800.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: When will his information be before the House and will it be printed in English or in French?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: French is the official language of the institute, and I presume that anything that goes out from it will be in that language, but we would distribute the information in both the languages which are official in this country. At the general meeting of the institute in December I expect to hear that the organization has been completed. It has been in progress of creation during the year, and as soon as it is
in thorough order the information ought to be gradually available to the different countries.


George Eulas Foster: How large and how expensive will the staff under this officer be?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: For the particula work of the institute I do not know that he will require more than two or three, but, as I said, this is not the only work to be as-siened to him. It is hoped that he will be able to do the general correspondence of the department and also a large work in the distribution of what I may call the literature of the department. We send out annually between half a million and three quarters of a million of documents from the department, and I have found difficulty and in some respects inefficiency, although I do not like to use such a harsh word, in the way in which at present these bulletins, reports and documents are sent out, emanating as they do from all the branches of the department. I want to bring this distribution under one office, and I propose to place that work in charge of this new officer. The work requires an officer of considerable standing and authority in the department.	[DOT]


George Eulas Foster: Is it to be a promotion or a new officer?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: A promotion, the position will be filled by Mr. Doherty in the division below.


George Eulas Foster: What salary is he now receiving?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I think about $2,300.


George Eulas Foster: And you propose to give him $2,800?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: He is raised to that position.


George Eulas Foster: Would he not be able to do that work on $2,300? Would he be any less effective?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I cannot say that he would be less effective, but at the same time he is not doing anything like as important work as he will be doing when placed in charge of this larger and more important work.


George Eulas Foster: Is there no officer in that class now under whom the work could be placed?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: No.


George Eulas Foster: And the Minister thinks Mr. Doherty would not be at all efficient if he did not get the rise?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I think that the rise is a just recognition of the importance of the work.


George Eulas Foster: What does the Minister expect to get from that institute? He has been airy and flying around, perhaps he would descend to particulars.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I have explained on several occasions what we expect to get from the institute. In the first place, we will take our position among other nations whose interests in agriculture are large, and I am conceited enough to think that the interests of agriculture in Canada are very large. W7e will get information and give information to an organization of an international character which has been started for the purpose of acting as I have explained as a sort of receiving house fof the agricultural information of the world and the redistributing of that agricultural information and statistical information in connection with the production of the world to all the countries taking _ part in the institute. That information will be of great value in more than one way. First of all, in a purely statistical way it will give information of the amounts of production in the different countries and the condition of the produce and crops. This information to a certain extent wall be of hse in dealing with the markets for these agricultural products. One of the chief aims of those who instituted this organization was to be able to get authoritative and accurate accounts of the crop production. At the present time there is no doubt that many of the reports that appear in the newspapers and even in some of the official statements of great corporations are tinged by a desire sometimes for personal gain, sometimes to make the market in regard to these great stable products of the world, and it is hoped that the reports of the International Institute will be of a sufficiently authoritative character to be able to counteract that kind of thing.
There is another direction in which it is hoped this institute may be of value. There is constantly going on to-day, in all the most important countries of the world, scientific research into agricultural problems. The discoveries resulting from that research in each country are made known to the people of that country. But the people of Canada know little of what is going on in other countries, and those of other countries do not know all that is going on in Canada. There will be an interchange of information with regard to all problems of agriculture, which to-day are more scientifically studied than they used to be years ago. By this institute the investigations made and practical work going on in all the great agricultural countries will be made of benefit to the farmers of Canada. Until the machinery is in working order and results are shown, I grant you, we should get no benefit from this expenditure. But when we have the organiza-Mr. FISHER.
tion and machinery to do the work, the results will be worth many times the cost.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: What is Canada's share of expense in Rome, and what is the total expense for this country?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Our contribution to be expended in the institute at Rome is about
12,000	francs ($2,315) a year. Then we have an item in the Estimates,, about $10,000 to provide for our representation there and for incidental expenses. This will be besides any expenditure under civil government in the department here for procuring this information. A good deal of information has come through the various documents already in existence. I could not tell my hon. friend (Mr. Armstrong) just what was spent last year. The item under consideration does not relate exactly to that. But I will have the facts ready for the hon. member when the item relating to that expenditure is before the committee.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: There will be some officials in addition to the expenditure here?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: At present, I am not asking for any addition to the staff of my office. There is a rearrangement of the staff as I have suggested. There are one or two vacancies in my civil government estimates here, some of which may have to be filled for the purpose of completing the staff. I could not say at the moment how many or which of them.


George Eulas Foster: There is an additional clerk in the second division, subdivision ' A.'


Sydney Arthur Fisher: That is to provide for the promotion of one of the patent examiners. The younger examiners are in the lower division, and, when they render efficient service, they are promoted.


George Eulas Foster: Who is to be promoted, and what is he receiving now?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Mr. Bonnell. He is receiving $1,200. He was transferred from the Interior Department to mine at that salary.


George Eulas Foster: And what salary will he receive?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: 


George Eulas Foster: You are making an in-, crease of $400?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes. We try the patent examiners in the lower division; and if they prove satisfactory they are promoted to the other.


George Eulas Foster: What experience has Mr. Bonnell had in the Patent Department?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: He was, I think, a draughtsman in the Topographical Branch of the Interior Department, and he was transferred to the Patent Branch because of education and special qualifications. He is a graduate of applied science of Toronto University and took a post-graduate course with the Westinghouse Electrical Manufacturing Company of Pittsburg. I may say that I appoint no patent examiners except those who have scientific degrees from one or the other of the universities.


George Eulas Foster: He has only been there a few months. He received no pay from the Agricultural Department last year?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: He was transferred some time during last summer. He will be promoted in the ensuing year, after he has been a year in the department at this work.


George Eulas Foster: Then, there are three less in the next division. One goes up from that division, I suppose?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes. In the framing of the estimates last year, we included enough for one or two vacancies, thinking we would require the clerks. But we have stricken these out.


George Eulas Foster: There is an extra in the third division.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes, taking the place of one of those struck out.


George Eulas Foster: And two extra in the next, subdivision ' B ' of the third division.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes, that is the lowest division. We have to make provision for bringing in clerks for the work of the department.


George Eulas Foster: Are you making provision for two new clerks there?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: The minister (Mr. Fisher) may have been present at a discussion in this House as to the advisability of employing too many of one family in the Civil Service. On page D-5 of the Auditor General's Report, about half the column is taken up with two family names. There are five Browns. These may or may not be of one family.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I do not know myself, but my accountant tells me they do not.


George Eulas Foster: Then there must be another family just above that, the family of Bradleys.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Well, one of those left the department this year.


George Eulas Foster: Why?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Resigned.


George Eulas Foster: So that leaves only two?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: I just called the Minister's attention to it, because .it looked to me like a family affair.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Will the Minister give us the number of employees in each branch of his department, and the actual salaries paid?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I do not think I have that here just now. The arrangement is in the subdivision under the Civil Service Rules. I can go over the list according to the branches, but I have not got that under my hand just now.


George Eulas Foster: In the matter of travelling expenses, I see Mr. Doherty has $328 for travelling expenses-in what capacity does he travel?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: That is his travelling expenses as the minister's private secretary.


George Eulas Foster: Did any good come of the Minister's going to Rome?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes, I think so.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: What is the total cost to the country of the expedition to
Rome?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I can look that up in the Auditor General's Report. Of course my own travelling expenses come out of the Minister's travelling expenses in contingencies. I think it was somewhere in the neighbourhood of $500.


George Eulas Foster: Much less than other men charge.
Contingencies, $13,500.


George Eulas Foster: How much was spent in contingencies last year?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: We had the same vote, I suppose nearly all of it was spent. We calculate very closely.


George Eulas Foster: In D-20 you appear to have spent $15,574. If you had the same vote you must have over expended.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: So far as I can make out, the explanation is that in the salaries at Ottawa there was an overdraft in consequence of a mistake in the time of the change of salaries from the outside service to the new arrangement of the inside service. I confess the explanation does not seem to me very clear. There is nothing in the Auditor General's Report which explains it.


George Eulas Foster: The Minister might look into that.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I will. I would like to draw attention to the fact that the whole increase of civil government in my department amounts to only $650.


George Eulas Foster: What was the whole increase last year?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Except for the change from the outside to the inside service about equal.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Are any of the officials of the Experimental Farm carried under this head?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes, all of them.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: How many officials?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: We would have to pick their names out from this list.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Any increase in the number over last year?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes, I have appointed two gentlemen to succeed the late Dr. Fletcher, one as an entomologist and the other as a botanist. Dr. Fletcher was both an entomologist and a botanist. The work has increased very much, and I did not think I could get one man qualified to do both classes of work. They get $2,100 each.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Is it true that the Minister imported an expert from England?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: It is true that through the Civil Service Commission two gentlemen imported from England are now in those two offices. I applied to the Civil Service Commission to look into the recommendations and qualifications of the applicants, and they recommended these two men to me. I did it through the ordinary course of the Civil Service Commission.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Had we no men in Canada sufficiently capable to fill those two positions, in the estimation of the Minister?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: The Minister did not express any opinion or estimation. There were between 20 and 30 applicants, some Canadians, some from the United States, some from Great Britain and some from India. We advertised for applications, and the applications, qualifications and everything of that kind were submitted to the Civil Service Commission, who, in conjunction with Dr. Saunders, examined the qualifications, and recommended these two men to me.


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: I would like to ask the Minister if he believes that the very best work it is possible to do in the interest of the farming community is being done at the Experimental Farms. I am asking this question very much in earnest, because I live comparatively near the Experimental Farm in Brandon. The present government, I believe, did not have the locating Mr. FOSTER.
of that farm, and I am of opinion that it is not in the proper place. An experimental farm, I understand, should have for its object the making of experiments in grains and other matters in connection with farming. If I am right in that conception, of an experimental farm, then I think that land should be selected for the purpose which is as nearly as possible like most of the land in that neighbourhood. I think that is a very fair conclusion. I do not think that ten or even five per cent of the land in Manitoba is similar to that upon which the experimental farm at Brandon is located.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I do not wish to interrupt my hon. friend and I would like to hear what he has to say in regard to the introduction and location of experimental farms, but what we are dealing with at the present time is civil government. My hon. friend is quite within his rights if he wishes to discuss the question of experimental farms, it is a very interesting question and I would like to have it discussed at length at the proper time.


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: I believe the question is as important as the minister states, but if he thinks it better not to continue this discussion I will leave it over until some other time when I hope we will have a thorough discussion as to the places where these farms are to be put.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I invite the hon. gentleman to take up the discussion when the item for experimental farms is on because I am quite in sympathy with what he has said and I would be only too glad if we could have a thorough discussion on the question. I look upon this as one of the most important services in the government.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Would the minister give us the names of the two men who were imported and the salaries they are receiving, and would he tell us whether he took into consideration the question as to whether it was possible to promote any men who were in these branches previous to the time when it was necessary for these positions to be filled?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: There was only one branch before, that of the entymologist and botanist. I consulted Dr. Saunders as to the possibility of a promotion. He said that he would recommend the obtaining of men who were thoroughly scientifically trained and that there was no such officer in the branch The gentleman who was appointed entymologist is Mr. Hewitt who comes from the University of Manchester where he was lecturing on entymologist and botany and who had the highest recommendations and diplomas possible to be obtained in that branch of science. I may also say he was intimately concerned in and was consulted about the drawing up of the law which was

passed not long ago in England to deal with insect pests. The gentleman who was appointed botanist is Mr. Gussow, originally a German, but who had been working in England, in the Kew Experimental gardens, with the famous Dr. Carruthers, head of the botanical work of the Department of Agriculture in England. He has the highest diplomas from German and British institutions, he has had scientific training and long experience in that kind of work and he carried with him recommendations from Dr. Carruthers of most positive and flattering character. They are to receive $2,100 a year each in subdivision B of the first division. I have an explanation in reply to the question which was asked by my hon. friend; I find that the item referred to which my hon. friend quotes at $15,009 was a part of the expenditure of the same year out of an appropriation in the estimates of $22,000 and not of $5,000.
Department of Inland Revenue-salaries, $100,912.50.	[DOT] s* !


Hon. WM. TEMPLEMAN (Minister of ' Inland Revenue).: The only increases are statutory increases.


George Eulas Foster: There is an extra clerk in the first division of subdivision B.


William Templeman: Yes, we have created an extra clerkship for the purpose of promoting the accountant, Mr. Campeau, who is at present at the maximum of the lower division and who is getting $2,800. We purpose recommending him for subdivision A of the first division.


George Eulas Foster: Why is that done?


William Templeman: Mr. Campeau is an official of the department, having served 35 years, and he is a competent man. This is putting him on an equality with the accountants in the other departments.


George Eulas Foster: Is there work for him to do?


William Templeman: Yes, the chief ac countant in the Inland Revenue Department is a very important official of the department.


George Eulas Foster: Is the accountant's branch made up of the seven clerks in the first division subdivision A and the first division, subdivision B?


William Templeman: They are not necessarily all in the accountant's branch. Mr Campeau is now in the first division, of subdivision B, and we propose to promote him. That will make one vacancy. We are creating one more clerkship for the purpose of promoting two clerks from subdivision A of the second division to subdivision B of the first division.


George Eulas Foster: Who are being promoted?


William Templeman: We have not decided yet. We are creating the vacancies. We have considered that probably, two of the best clerks at the head of the subdivision 'A' of the second division will receive the promotion. We are doing the same with regard to the next division. The vacancies created by these promotions will be filled by promotions from the lower division. In the second subdivision 'B' there is no change. There are four increases in the third division, subdivision A. This is simply making provision for promotion from the classes below under the Civil Service Act. There is an increase of two over the total employees of the department last year-44 instead of 42. The work of the department has been increasing. Last year we passed the Commercial Feeding Stuffs Act which comes into force the 1st of January and the Patent Medicine Act, which entailed additional work, and" we are providing for two extra clerks if required. -They are not yet appointed.	[DOT]


George Eulas Foster: The minister has not given much information or reasons. He sets out with the idea that it is his duty to deplete the lower division and get the men into the higher division as quickly as possible. He has taken half from the third division, subdivision B, and put them into a higher division. There is something to be said in favour of promoting men, but if the minister is going to bestow all his activity in putting people up from lower divisions to higher divisions, he will soon have no lower divisions at all. What salaries are these four in the third division, whom he proposes to put into subdivision A, now getting? and what work are they doing?


William Templeman: There are no promotions from third division, subdivision A.


George Eulas Foster: What about third division, subdivision B?


William Templeman: The hon. gentleman said that I was striving to promote from one division to another. Well, there are no promotions from third division, subdivision A, but I propose to move some from subdivision B to subdivision A of the third subdivision.


George Eulas Foster: What are the reasons you are promoting these four?


William Templeman: These clerks are largely statistical and are doing very good work. They are now receiving the maximum of the salary in their class and are deserving of promotion. Several of them have been a long time in the service. It is proposed to promote them and give them the minimum salary of subdivision B, to be strictly in accord with the spirit and intention of the Act. They can only get

their promotions on the recommendation of the deputy minister and the approval of the commission.


George Eulas Foster: Would the minister give me the names of the four who are to be promoted?


William Templeman: Their names are
Yetts, Lyon, Allen and Lewis. They are the senior clerks in that division.


George Eulas Foster: How long has Mr. Yetts been in the service?


William Templeman: Since 1895. Mr. Lewis came in - on the reorganization of the service, but was employed temporarily before that for about two years. Mr. Allen
has been in the service about two years and Mrs. Lyon about two years.


George Eulas Foster: Will the minister kindly give me the names of the four left in possession, and state how long they have been in the service?


William Templeman: Arthur Robert came into the service in 1901, Ekins in 1907, Tee-vens in 1907 and Cantin in 1908.


George Eulas Foster: If you are going to recompense those who have been longest in the service, Mr. Yetts, who came in in 1905, has a fair claim to promotion. You have promoted one who has been only two years doing temporary work, while Robert, who has been eight years in the service, and is I suppose at the maximum of his staff, is left. What is it debars him?


William Templeman: It is all a question of the ability of the clerks. Those I have named are, in the opinion of the deputy minister, the ones most efficient and most worthy of promotion at the present time. The whole matter of promotion is absolutely in the hands of the deputy minister, subject of course to the Civil Service Commission.


George Eulas Foster: I do not know the clerks myself, and cannot pass any opinion on them. In that respect I suppose I am pretty much in the same position as the minister. who says he leaves all the promotions to his deputy. I am inclined to think that he has sometimes ideas of his own on the subject. If he left it entirely with the deputy, I am inclined to think that the proper ones would be apt to get promoted.
Department of Inland Revenue-contingencies, $8,000.


George Eulas Foster: I see that B. C. Nicholas has an account of $609.30 for travelling expenses. Who is B. C. Nicholas?


William Templeman: He is my private secretary.


George Eulas Foster: Does not the minister think it would be more the square deal not to shoulder off on Mr. Nicholas the charge Mr. TEMPLEMAN.
of $609 for flaunting around the country when it is really the minister who has been doing it? The only justification for paying Mr. Nicholas $609 for travelling expenses is that he has been on some official business. Was he on some official business, or was he accompanying the minister?


William Templeman: My hon. friend will probably see in the Auditor General's Report a small charge for travelling expenses for the minister.


George Eulas Foster: That is what I complain of. The minister is a larger man, and why does he not bear his own expenses?


William Templeman: I hope the hon. gentleman does not accuse me of charging^ to my private secretary a sum of money which I have expended-because that is the suggestion. The travelling expenses of my private secretary w'ere incurred on a visit to Nova Scotia and on a visit to British Columbia, accompanying me in both cases. I assume that the difference in our expenses is due to the fact that, like my hon. friend, I travel on a pass while my private secretary does not.


Mr. HENDERSON.: Does the minister not travel in a special private car, in which his private secretary would travel also, at no expense to the country beyond the cost of hauling the car? I would be surprised to find the minister travelling in an ordinary car such as we common mortals on this side of the House travel in. In the west during the last summer I did not find any of the ministers travelling otherwise than in a special car.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: You did not look very hard then.


David Henderson: The Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley) looks at me because I found him travelling as a pilgrim in the pilgrim car.


Mr. PUGSLEY.: I was delighted to meet you too.	'


David Henderson: I was delighted to meet the minister because he treated me to a very nice dinner. I had a foretaste of what may happen some day when members on this side of the House will have an opportunity of going on pilgrimages. Surely the Minister of Inland Revenue is not going to travel in a less gentlemanly way than the Minister of Public Works or the Minister of Militia or the Minister of Agriculture.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Did the Minister of Agriculture travel through the west in a private car?


David Henderson: I did not see him in one.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Or anywhere else


David Henderson: Possibly he does not. I think when he went to Halton to try to induce the farmers there to elect a doctor from Toronto to represent them, he travelled in a very plain way and tried to show himself as the friend of the farmer. I may be mistaken, possibly the Minister of Agriculture does not travel in a special car, but I would be surprised if a minister from British Columbia would come down here and go down to Nova Scotia and not travel in a special car. I thought that every one of the ministers had a private car. Perhaps the minister can explain whether he actually did travel in a private car and that may explain how it was that the expenses of his private secretary were so large as compared with his own.


William Templeman: If it is of any interest to the House I have no objection to stating the facts. I do not think the hon. gentleman will find very excessive travelling expenses against either my private secretary or myself. I was in Nova Scotia on one occasion on an official visit but I was not in a private car, I paid my Pullman car accommodation to the Intercolonial railway and my private secretary did the same. " I was in British Columbia a year or two ago in company with Mr. Brock, director of the Geological Survey, visiting all the mines. On that occasion I had the use of a government car, an old private car which was very useful, indeed, as we stopped at all the small places from the Crows-nest to the west end of the Columbia & Western and the Victoria & Eastern road. Without a private car it would have been absolutely impossible to have visited very many of the small mining towns of British Columbia. On my last visit to the west I travelled as my hon. friend from Halton (Mr. Henderson) travelled and paid my Pullman fare as he did. I met him in Vancouver and I do not think he saw me in a private car. I do not think the ministers generally, travel in private cars to any extent, but I would certainly do so if I thought it necessary. It was sometimes necessary in my case, not only in order to be able to live in the car, but to_ receive visits from persons interested, for instance, in mining.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I would not have interjected anything if the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson) had not said that he met ministers in the west who had been travelling in private cars. I happen to be one of the ministers who spent a good deal of time in the west this summer and I asked him if he met me in a private car. If I had felt it to be in the interest of the public to carry a private car with me I would have done so. As a matter of fact I find it more convenient not to have one, and generally do not have one. I do not think that on any trip around the country I have
taken a private car. I can understand that ministers may find it more convenient to do so and if they do find it more convenient I think they should take the .car.


Mr. DANIEL.: Perhaps the Minister of Railways would explain how the expense of hauling private cars over other lines than government lines is met. Do the ordinary railways charge so much a mile for hauling a private car or do they haul it free of expense?


George Perry Graham: When a minister takes an official car he makes his own arrangement with tjie railways as to its transportation. The Minister of Railways on account of the position he holds, is entitled to free transportation on any railway in Canada and he gets free transportation for his car on any railway in the United States as well. My department is under compliment to the railways for hauling a car, in fact I have been censured several times modestly by managers of railways because I did not take my car, as they always took theirs. When any other minister takes a car he makes his own arrangements for its transportation.


David Henderson: What is that arrangement?


George Perry Graham: I do not know.


John Waterhouse Daniel: The Minister of Public Works travels sometimes in a private car. Perhaps he would inform the House how the expense of hauling the car is arranged with other railways than the Intercolonial railway.	.


William Pugsley: In the accounts of my department it will not be found that any charge has been made for the transportation of my not private but official car. I never travel in a private car. The car is an official car where I transact the business of my department when I travel, but as far as possible I very much prefer to travel in an ordinary Pullman. It is very much more expensive to the Minister to get a car from the Department of Railways than to travel in an ordinary Pullman. I find that we have to pay for all our food and even to pay the laundry bills and in going a comparatively short distance as to St. John and other places in New Brunswick I have found it very much more expensive to engage a car from the Railway Department than to travel in the Pullman and pay my own expenses, and ordinarily I take the Pullman. During the last summer I made an official visit ito the Northwest. It became necessary for me to stop off at a great many different places where public works are either under construction or in contemplation. I found that I could not possibly attend to that work without having an official car, and I did arrange to have it. And the Canadian Pacific railway very

kindly transported the car free of charge over its railway-it extended me' that courtesy. The same was done by the Canadian Northern.


John Waterhouse Daniel: I do not think that anyone objects to the Minister of Public Works or any other minister, when on public business that requires it, using an official car. But I was a little surprised to find, from the statement of the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley), that in such cases the minister was called upon to meet the expenditures for food, laundry, etc., used in his private car. Have I understood it aright?


William Pugsley: That is the case.


John Waterhouse Daniel: I was under the impression that I had seen in the Auditor General's Eeport on several occasions charges for supplies on private cars. I do not say that any of these was in connection with the private car of the Minister of Public Works, as I do not remember. But I am a little surprised, and I think other members of the House will be surprised, to find that the minister himself pays these expenditures for provisioning and other charges in connection with his official car out of his own pocket.


William Pugsley: That not only includes all supplies of every kind for the minister himself, but for every person who is travelling with him, and also the attendants upon the car. So, all the expenditures of every kind in the way of supplies, laundry and so on are paid by the minister who is travelling.


John Waterhouse Daniel: And the minister makes no claim for that on the public treasury?


William Pugsley: Unless he might do it in the way of travelling expenses. I do not say he does.
Department of Labour-Salaries, $32,300; Contingencies, $12,000.


Hon. MACKENZIE KING (Ijjinister of Labour).: I may mention that there is a clerical error in the explanation of this item of salaries. In the fourth line, relating to second division, subdivision 'A', it is stated that there are two clerks at $800. That should read one clerk at $800. Then, in the sixth line, referring to third division, subdivision B, instead of one clerk at $800, it should be two at $800. This is a mere reversal of the figures and does not add to the total.


George Eulas Foster: It seems to me that, if it appears in the estimate as third division, subdivision B, one clerk at $800, the minister cannot make it two. I should be inclined to think that could only be done by a supplementary estimate.


William Pugsley: 


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It will not change the total amount asked for, but merely reverses the figures.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Are any of these employees now in the eastern provinces making an investigation of the coal strike?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The deputy minister of the department has made a full investigation into the situation there and has prepared a careful report on the whole situation, which report I shall be glad to lay on the table of the House in the course of a day or so.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: How long is it since that report was completed?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It is some weeks since it was prepared.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: And will it be placed on the table at an early day?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think I can promise it for Monday possibly.


Mr. CROCKET.: How many employees are there in the Labour Department at Ottawa?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: At present nineteen.


George Eulas Foster: I see that there are two extra in the second division, subdivision A. Will the minister explain that?


William Stevens Fielding: The details are given on page 26 of the estimates.


George Eulas Foster: But what we want is the reason.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That is the item I called attention to. - There should be only one clerk at $800. That provides for an additional
clerk one with a knowledge of French.


George Eulas Foster: But there is an addition of two besides.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: One is a stenographer and the other is accountant.


George Eulas Foster: At what salary does the stenographer enter?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: At $500. The additional clerk to take the position of accountant is provided for in in the second division, subdivision A, a clerk at $1,200. Heretofore the accounting of the department has been carried on by the accountant of the Post Office Department. But now that the Department of Labour has been given a separate standing in the service, it is proposed to have an accountant of its own.


George Eulas Foster: But there are two additions in the third division, subdivision B. One is a stenographer at $500 and what is the other?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: A stenographer at $800, one with a knowledge of French to assist in the correspondence.


George Eulas Foster: Why does he enter at the maximum of his class?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think it would be impossible to find a clerk at less than $800 who would carry out the work satisfactorily. Something more than the ordinary routine work is required of the one in this position.
v. Mr. FOSTER. But the schedule provides that in this class they commence at $500 and go up to $800. If clerks are to be appointed at the maximum, you might as well have no Civil Service Act at all.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Would*the minister (Mr. King) be good enough to give us a general idea of what these officials in the department are doing?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It would take some little time to outline, even in a very general way, the work of the officials of the department. But I may say that the department publishes a monthly journal, the ' Labour Gazette '. Several officers conduct investigations and compile reports and statistical tables relating to strikes and lockouts, changes in the rates of wages the cost of living, industrial accidents, and like subjects. The services of others are made necessary by the Industrial Disputes' Act, establishing boards under that Act, carrying on correspondence and the preparation of the reports sent by the different parties concerned. There are also officers whose duty it is to prepare schedules of wages for insertion in public contracts-the fair wage officers. They travel in different parts of the Dominion and investigate what are fair rates of wages to be paid for the different classes of labour on wmrks being carried on for the government. Then there is a great deal of correspondence in the department itself, in the nature of answers to inquiries in regard to industrial questions in this country, wages changes, and a great variety of subjects. There is also a great deal of correspondence from other countries and from individuals, as to the working of the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. Then there are other officials of the department who are engaged in the work of translating, as the 'Labour Gazette' is published in French as well as English. There are also clerks who have to keep track of the expenditures, and the amounts derived from the sale of the 'Labour Gazette', subscription lists and such work as newspaper offices are obliged to do. There is also a library in the department under the charge of a clerk.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Do contingencies include the cost of printing the ' Labour Gazette ' ?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: No.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Does this item include payment of correspondents of the ' Labour Gazette ' all over the country?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: No, that comes under the general estimates. The cost of printing and publishing the ' Labour Gazette ' includes the amounts paid to correspondents.


John Waterhouse Daniel: How many copies of the ' Labour Gazette ' are issued, and to whom are they issued?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The department ha.s a list of paid subscribers numbering, I think, about 9,000. Then there is a free_ list, including secretaries of the trade unions, boards of trade, members of both Houses of parliament, labour departments in other countries, and societies with which we exchange periodicals. Altogether about 14,000 copies of the ' Gazette ' are issued each month.


John Waterhouse Daniel: What is the revenue obtained from paying subscriptions?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The revenue as given in the Auditor General's Report last year is $1,669.82. The amount charged for the ' Labour Gazette ' is 20 cents per annum. Bound copies of the ' Labour Gazette ' are sold at 50 cents a copy. The revenue of the department is derived from the sale of bound copies, and from the sale of individual copies, and the general subscriptions.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Where is the " Labour Gazette ' printed?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The department obtains the ' Gazette ' from the King's Printer. There have 'been times when the Printing Bureau has been much crowded, and the King's Printer has found it neces-sarv to have his own arrangements. But as far as our department is concerned, we deal with the King's Printer.
At six o'clock committee took recess
After Recess.
Committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. CROTHERS.: I see that there is $600 here for ' Allowance for private secretary.' Why it is necessary to make that allowance? Why could not a clerk in the department do the work of a private secretary?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The other clerks of the department have their specific duties to perform and therefore they are not available for this work. The secretary is a very hard worked official. His time is not his own. Regular clerks work the prescribed hours only. He gives virtually his entire time to the duties he has to perform. My secretary, Mr. Francis W. Giddens has frequently worked with me four nights in a week from seven until twelve o'clock, and I would like to say of him that a more faithful or ef-| ficient officer in the discharge of his duties is not to be found in the public service.


Mr. J. D. TAYLOR.: I would like to call the attention of the minister to the fact that a great many Japanese who were American citizens came, over from this United States during the recent fishing season and obtained employment in the fisheries in British Columbia waters. I would like to ask the minister how it was that these Japanese, who were American citizens, came to be employed in Canada. It occurred to me that probably the Department of Labour, being alive to the interests of that class of labour and having seen this statement reported in the press, and had got busy and ascertained why these men had obtained this employment thus depriving a certain number of Canadian fishermen of the livelihood that they were entitled to. Perhaps the minister could tell me if he has any information on that subject?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: In regard to that I would say that any department of government would hardly find it expedient to act on reports that appear in the press from time to time. This particular report of which the hon. gentleman has spoken did not come to my notice. Had the matter beef) as serious as it appears to have been, the parties, one would think, would have been sufficiently .interested to have notified the department of a case of that sort and requested an investigation. If a notification of that kind were to come to the department an investigation certainly would be proceeded with, if it fell within the scope of the department's work. It is quite possible that in the case which has been mentioned these men may have been employed in violation of some existing Act, in the event of which there would have been redress in the courts, but without the particulars having been presented to the department in a formal way I hardly think the department would have been justified in proceeding of its own accord.


James Davis Taylor: I might ask the minister whether that would come within the scope of the duties of the local correspondents, whether they are supposed to take cognizance of a thing of that kind.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Correspondents are expected to report on matters in their districts of interest to the department, correspondents are not informants expected to notify the department of the violations of any existing laws; they are to send in records of the actual happenings in their district so as to furnish statistical and descriptive records.


James Davis Taylor: There is a correspondent at Vancouver and another at Westminster and this matter was very conspicuous in the press there. It seems to me the Labour Department could not be more usefully employed than in taking up a matter of that kind which is not the busi-Mr. KING.
ness of any person in particular who is not in the government service. How are the correspondents of the ' Labour Gazette ' appointed? Are they recommended by the labour organizations or by the political organizations. '


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The department has sought to secure as correspondent some person who is thought to be persona grata to the industrial classes, not necessarily the labour element alone, but employers as well. Before any appointment has been made the department has as a rule ascertained from different sources the standing of those to be appointed. In some instances recommendations has been made by the member, in which cases further communication may have been had with other parties to ascertain the standing of the person recommended. The appointments are not made as political appointments at all. I am not aware of any having been so made and I should be very sorry to see them made for that reason


James Davis Taylor: Would the minister consider it the duty of the department, now that attention has been called to the matter, to find out how these Japanese who are American citizens, came to be working in Canada under the guise of British subjects and having licenses issuable only to British subjects. Will the minister investigate and endeavour to protect the labourers on the Fraser river?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I should like to look carefully into all the circumstances to see whether it properly comes within the jurisdiction of the department to do what the hon. gentleman suggests. If on investigation I find that to be so I will certainly he pleased to follow it up.


James Davis Taylor: Is it a fact that the ' Labour Gazette ' is printed in an office outside of the Government Printing Bureau?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: At present I understand that is the case. The pressure of work has been such that the King's Printer found it impossible to print the ' Labour Gazette ' at the Bureau, and he made an arrangement with an outside office to do the printing.	.


James Davis Taylor: What office?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I understand that the Ottawa ' Free Press ' is where the ' Gazette ' is being, printed at the present time. The King's Printer has made an arrangement, I understand, having in view what lie regarded as the best arrangement to make.


James Davis Taylor: I presume the King's Printer called for tenders?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I presume so, but it not being in my department I cannot say.


James Davis Taylor: This ' Labour Gazette ' according to the imprint is printed by ' C. H. Parmelee, Printer to the Ring's Most Excellent Majesty ' and on it there is a union label. I find that on a copy of the estimates which I have in my hand there is no union label. Does that explain the different fashion of printing these two official documents?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Some nine or ten years ago when the ' Labour Gazette ' was first published the union label was put on as an indication that the work was being performed under fair conditions. I understand that the Government Printing Bureau was an open shop, but notwithstanding that, the conditions were such that those controlling the label authorized the Printing Bureau to use it on the ' Labour Gazette.' As it was a publication which was circulating largely among the working classes it was thought advisable to have the label put on it under these circumstances, and there does not seem to be any reason to discontinue the practice.


James Davis Taylor: That is, that in the case of a publication circulating largely among the labouring classes the union label is attached in order to lead the labouring classes to believe that the government printing is carried on under the conditions called for by the' appearance of that union label, whereas as a matter of fact the government printing is not carried on under these conditions, and the government printing office is not what they call a fair office, to take tlie expression used by the minister.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I do not remember having used the expression ' fair ' office.


James Davis Taylor: My hon. friend beside me tells me that the expression used by the minister was ' open shop.' I believe the open shop is not recognized by union labour as the ideal condition.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think that many trade unionists would prefer to have the closed shop, but I do not think that trade unionists necessarily hold that because a shop is an open shop the conditions may not be as fair as they are in a closed shop. The conditions that are important to labour are the hours of labour, the wages paid, and the sanitary conditions under which the employees work; all of these conditions are excellent 'at the Government Printing Bureau. That being so those who are interested in seeing such conditions furthered by means of the label were quite agreeable that the label should be put on the ' Labour Gazette ' when it was printed at the Government Bureau notwithstanding that the Bureau was not a closed shop.


Robert Laird Borden: I understand the minister to say that the label was attached as an indication that the work was performed under fair conditions.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That is exactly what I said.


Robert Laird Borden: Does not the union label usually mean that the shop is not an open shop?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It usually does mean that, but not always.


Robert Laird Borden: This is one illustration. Are there any others?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think there are others.


Robert Laird Borden: Could the minister name one?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I could not name one at the moment, but I have no doubt that with a little research I could find one.


James Davis Taylor: Last session I asked the then Minister of Labour whether he would be kind enough to use his influence with the Postmaster General to have the fair wage clause inserted in all postal contracts. I suppose that, owing to the relationship then existing between the Minister of Labour and the Postmaster General, he handed that matter over to his successor. I would like to ask the present Minister of Labour whether he has discussed that with the Postmaster General, and whether there is any prospect of the fair wage clause being attached to contracts of the Post Office Department.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My present impression is that the fair wage clause forms a part of every contract of the Post Office Department. In connection with contracts for postal supplies, such as letter carriers' uniforms and the like, the Department of Labour has been asked to approve of schedules of rates of wages of firms tendering for this class of work before the Post Office Department would make the contract, and I believe that in some cases contracts have been refused by the Post Office Department because of the unwillingness of some firms to pay what were regarded as fair and reasonable wages.


James Davis Taylor: Are we to understand that the Postmaster General submits all mail to the Minister of Labour and receives from him an opinion whether they provide for the payment of fair wages for the work performed?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I was speaking with reference to supplies furnished to the Post Office Department. I had not in mind the question of carrying the mails. I have no doubt, however, that the desire of the Postmaster General would be to see that a fair rate of wages was paid to everybody engaged in that work, and if it became apparent that such was not the case, I am sure that he would be willing and glad to confer with the Department of Labour on the subject.	,


James Davis Taylor: I would ask the Minister of Labour to be good enough to take that up with the Postmaster General, because I know that in my part of the country the pay of the Post Office Department for services of that kind is most miserable, and does not at all approximate to what in our country is considered fair wages. I am sure that he could not do a more popular act than to secure the reform I have suggested from the Post Office Department.
Department of Labour - contingencies,
512,000.


Mr. E. L. BOEDEN.: Is there any increase in that?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: There is an increase, which however is more apparent than real. Heretofore the amount of money required for purposes included under the head of contingencies has been voted in the miscellaneous vote, which covered the entire expenditure of the Department of Labour. This year the amount has been separated so as to bring the contingencies under one head. Against an increase of $10,550 there should be offset a reduction of $7,400 in the vote being asked this year as compared with 1909-10, whh'h makes a net increase of only $3,150. Such items as printing and stationery, sundries and clerical and other assistance, will hereafter be paid out of contingencies, in conformity with the practice in other departments. I might say that the staff is larger than before. The minister's office and the minister's secretary's office come into consideration in this connection, as well as expenses for travelling on the part of the fair wage officers and other officers connected with the administration of the Industrial Disputes Act and other measures There is also an additional amount put in to enable the department to purchase necessary books and periodicals.
Department of Customs-salaries, $244,975.


Frederick William Borden: I suppose the minister thinks the increase is worthy of a little explanation.


Hon. WM. PATERSON (Minister of Customs).: The committee will observe that we are proposing to have six additional clerks. We propose to put them in the second division, subdivision B, ranging from $800 to $1,600, starting them at the minimum. There are statutory increases amounting to $4,525; and there is the proposed promotion of six officers from the third division B, to the third division A. Three of these now receive $800 and three $750. They will be promoted to the minimum of subdivision A, namely, $900. That means increases of three at $100 and three at $150, a total of $750. But we are not asking for that much more money, because Mr. KING.
certain officers have replaced other officers at lower Tates of salary. For instance, a vacant clerkship in the second division B, of an estimated salary of $800, caused by the death of Mr. Eoehester in December, was filled by the appointment of T. L. Burns in the third division at $750, resulting in a decrease of $50. Then, a vacant clerkship in the second division B, at an estimated salary of S800, caused by the resignation of F. A. Cleminson in September, 1908, was filled by the appointment of Mr. Kyder in the third division B at $750, making a decrease of $50. A new clerkship in the second division B at an estimated salary or $800, was filled by the appointment of John Nolan in the third division at $750, making another decrease of $50. A vacant clerkship in the second division B, caused by the death of E. McConnell in June, 1909, his estimated salary being $1,250, was filled by the appointment of H. L. Carson in the same division at a minimum salary of $800, making a decrease of $450. Then, Mr. Fin-nigan, a clerk in the second division, subdivision B, whose estimated salary last year was $1,150, was transferred to the outside service at the port of London, on October, 1, 1909. This vacancy is estimated to be filled by the appointment of a clerk in the same division at a minimum salary of $800. There is a decrease there of $350. Mr. Methot, a clerk in the second division, subdivision B, whose estimated salary for 1909-10, w^as $1,200, was replaced by Mr. A. B. Sowter, an officer of the outside service at Winchester, B.C., who came in at $1,000, a decrease of $200. A vacancy in the third division, subdivision A, caused by the resignation of J. N. Cram, whose estimated salary was $950, was filled by the appointment of Mr. A. S. Ogilvy at the minimum salary of $500, a decrease of $450. Of the amount provided for fiat increases, $23,900, the sum of $800 was unused, $600 in the second division and $200 ' in the lower grades. As the estimates for 1909-10 were prepared on the basis of officers who were transferred from outside votes receiving their statutory increases from the first of April, whereas they were only granted those increases from the first of October, there was an over-estimate of $1,275. Allowing for these reductions, we have $3,675 as the net increase that we are providing for. The six additional officers we propose to bring in, and for whom we provide $4,800 are expected to be required, perhaps, in the statistical branch, owing to the operation of the French treaty. Of course, we must keep a detailed record of that trade for statistical purposes. Hitherto, under the more limited treaty that has been in existence, there was not much work involved, but the new treaty with its wider scope will make necessary additions to the staff of the Statistical Department.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not understand that. Why should it be so?


William Paterson: We shall have to open another set of books and have a special column in our returns because of the treaty. With the few articles coming in under the old treaty, the clerks'could note these entries as they came to them and make up their tables with comparatively little labour. But now this special column will have to be added, and we shall be able to give, month by month, in our unrevised statement, statistics with reference to that trade.


Robert Laird Borden: I would like to understand the minister's theory on this subject. What is it that makes the preparation of these statistics, more difficult? Suppose there were no treaty at all, and you had exactly the same amount of imports and exports, would these additional assistants be required? I ask purely for information.


William Paterson: I do not wonder that the hon. member (Mr. R. L. Borden) asks the question for I asked it myself when the proposition first came before me The same idea occurred to me that, I suppose, is in the mind of the hon. member-that if more goods come in from France there might be so many less come in from other countries. But, under the old treaty, when an invoice came before our statistical officers, they could pick out the articles coming under the treaty, as they were few, and by merely keening a running memorandum, it was easy to sum them up. But now that the French treaty will embrace a very large number of articles, and with other nations as well as France receiving the benefit of this most favoured nations treatment, there will be many shipments coming in under the treaty-most of them from France, of course, but some from other countries, making it necessary to keep, day by day, a regular tabulated record which will show the workings of the treaty.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not know whether I understand it yet. Is" it because the officers are obliged to apply a third tariff, the intermediate tariff, or is it because the government anticipate a larger importation, or both?


William Paterson: It is the intermediate tariff.


Robert Laird Borden: That is, you have a third tariff?


William Paterson: Yes, I should have said that.


Robert Laird Borden: The minister thinks it really necessary to have these additional officers?


Mr PATERSON.: I questioned it, just as the hon. member does. It was explained
to me. But I further put my officers under promise that unless they found these additional officers to be necessary, they are not to be put on. My officers promised that unless these men are required they will not be put on. Of course these work with other clerks, certain officers take the port of Montreal, others the port of Toronto, and the work will be divided in that way. It may be that we will not have to put on six men.


Robert Laird Borden: There is a very simple alternative, to repeal the intermediate tariff.


William Paterson: Oh, yes, but what a misfortune that would be.


Robert Laird Borden: To these men who would not get their appointments. As far as the country is concerned, it would be far quicker.


David Henderson: Is it proposed to have a separate column for every country that will enjoy the same privileges as France enjoys or will all countries that come under that intermediate tariff be thrown together? If so I do not see that it will afford us much information as to the extent to which our trade with France will be improved under this French treaty.


William Paterson: The intention is to have on the margin the countries for which goods are imported as they are in the general tariff in the trade and navigation returns now. We will apply the same thing to the intermediate tariff so that you will see what other countries are participating and to what extent the trade with France has developed.


David Henderson: Then we will have to go all through the trade and navigation returns to see what that increase is.


William Paterson: Unless we do it for you. We have summaries and we will try and do that.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the meaning of the increase in contingencies?


William Paterson: Under the Civil Service Act we are empowered to employ clerical and other assistance temporarily as for instance in the case of the illness of an official but without such a vote as this there is no provision for paying these extra clerks. I cannot say that all or any of this will be expended.


Robert Laird Borden: The commissioner
recommends it, does he?


William Paterson: Oh surely.
Department of Railways and Canals-Civil government, salaries including M. J. Butler at .$8,000, $130,187.50.


Hon. GEO  P.@: GRAHAM (Minister of
Railways and Canals). By a glance at the

estimates, it will be seen there is a reduction of $9,500. The number of clerks is reduced by six. In one division there is an increase of one. That is caused by the promotion of Mr. Little, the accountant in the department, to the first division subdivision A, which was done in the usual way through the Civil Service Commission. During the last five years I think Mr. Little has handled oyer $139,000,000. He is one of the most important officials we have and has been in the service some 28 years. That is the only increase in any class and there is a decrease in the total expenditure of $9,500.


Robert Laird Borden: It is interesting to observe that a decrease is really an increase. Where is the increase in this case?


George Perry Graham: There is absolutely no increase in the total. The decrease comes from the fact that while some officials have statutory increases, and Mr. Little's salary will be increased in promoting him from one class to the other, we drop some six clerks from the total that weTe in the estimates of last year. So we have a net increase in the expenditure of $9,500.


Robert Laird Borden: Is there an actual decrease in the number of clerks employed?


George Perry Graham: The decrease is rather in the estimate of last year. We had several vacancies in the department, and in our reorganization I came to the conclusion that we could get along without filling those vacancies, and they are dropped from the reorganization.
Contingencies, $15,000.


George Perry Graham: This is the same figure as it has been for years.


David Henderson: What is the item of $10,000 expended for printing and stationery?


George Perry Graham: There is all the printing and stationery for the department, for instance, the annual report. There is almost an unlimited quantity of stationery used in the various branches of the department, books and stationery of all kinds. Besides the annual report, special reports have to be printed.


David Henderson: Does $10,000 cover all that?


George Perry Graham: It covers the departmental printing.


David Henderson: I must compliment the minister on his economy. I should expect it more likely to be $30,000.


Oswald Smith Crocket: That does not cover the printing for the railway?


George Perry Graham: Not for the Intercolonial, the Intercolonial pays for its own report.


George Perry Graham: 


Mr. STANFIELD.: Is it the intention to start a purchasing agency in Ottawa to buy supplies for the Intercolonial?


George Perry Graham: Yes, in connection with the Intercolonial we are establishing a purchasing agency. Of course that will come in the Intercolonial estimates. But we intend to have a purchasing agency under the direct control of the department.


David Henderson: Where is this printing done?


George Perry Graham: I think our departmental work and our reports are all printed at the Printing Bureau, but I am not positive. It all comes through the King's Printer at least.


David Henderson: So did the report of-the Department of Labour come through the King's Printer, it bore his impress, and yet it seemed to have been farmed out. I do not know whether the Minister of Railways is engaged in farming operations as well as the Minister of Labour.


George Perry Graham: The head of the Printing Bureau would have to say that, personally I do not know. We get our report from the King's Printer, I imagine it is done at the Printing Bureau.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Are tenders asked for the supply of any of this stationery?


George Perry Graham: I stated before that we do not ask for tenders for stationery, our printed material is supplied by the King's Printer. The head of that department would be able to say how it is done.


John Waterhouse Daniel: I understand your printing is done there, I was referring to stationery.


William Pugsley: There is a stationery department to which all requisitions go for stationery.


Robert Laird Borden: Who is the head of that department?


George Perry Graham: The Secretary of State is the head of the Printing Bureau, and of the Stationery Department as well.


William Paterson: When the Secretary of State is here he will be able to show that it is all right.


Robert Laird Borden: He may be able to say it is all right, but he ought to be here to say it. It is not satisfactory to be told that we should get information from some one else who is not here. If that information is necessary from some one else, that person ought to be here to give it.


William Paterson: Does the hon. gentleman mean the supplying of stationery to all the departments?


Robert Laird Borden: An inquiry is made as to whether there are tenders; the

minister says he does not know, we will have to apply to the head of some other department. Then I say if we are to apply to the head of some other department that head ought to be here to give the information.


William Paterson: He will no doubt give it when he is here passing the estimates in his department.


George Perry Graham: So far as an item in any department is concerned, we do not ask for tenders, we send a requisition for it. When the Department of the Secretary of ' State comes up, all this will be a matter for criticism, how he does all this.


David Henderson: In the meantime you have got your money voted.


John Waterhouse Daniel: This is the first time I have learned that you apply to the Secretary of State with your requisitions for stationery. All I have heard mentioned before was the Printing Bureau.


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend will understand that no person has said that he applied to the Secretary of State. Requisitions are made to the King's Printer. The question was asked who is the head of the department; it is the Secretary of State.


Robert Laird Borden: Certainly he is the King's Printer for the purpose of giving information to this House. Is it a charge from one department to the other, as if it were an actual purchase, or what is the system?


George Perry Graham: I think you will find we are responsible to the King's Printer in cash, as if it were a transaction betwen our department and some outside printing establishment.


Robert Laird Borden: He supplies the other departments at certain prices, and the question is whether or not, in laying in those supplies, he adopts the system of tender, and no one knows anything about it.


George Perry Graham: He will be able to tell you that.


William Paterson: I have no doubt he does apply for tenders in many cases.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: We tried to obtain from the Minister of Labour some information in regard to the printing done in the Printing Bureau, and he finally gave us to understand that it was done by the Free Press Printing Company in this town, and apparently not done by tender at all. That item this year amounts to $23,300. Certainly it is a proper question to ask, and there should be some information.


George Perry Graham: Perhaps the head of that department will say when his department is under discussion that he did get tenders for it.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: All we could get from the Minister of Labour was that the Printing Bureau did the work, and that he knew nothing further about it.


George Perry Graham: As to buying by tender, knowing something about buying paper and supplies of that kind, I am inclined to think that when the Secretary of State comes to make his reply he will have to say that he buys his paper as any dealer does, getting it from the best people at the best price he can. Any man who is engaged in the paper business often buys his stock by tender.


Robert Laird Borden: The Minister of Customs says that this is a very proper question when the Secretary of State is in his place. What kind of a question is it when the secretary is not in his place? I remember an incident occurring once in a court in Nova Scotia where witness was trying to explain to counsel what kind of a dog a retriever was and finally, to make himself understood, he said: He is a dog which, if you throw your handkerchief away, will go and bring it to you, whereupon counsel responded: What kind of a dog is h& when you do not have any handkerchief?
Department of Marine and Fisheries-Salaries, $250,150.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The amount voted last year for this item was $247,830. This year $250,150 is asked, or an increase of $2,320. The increase is made up as follows: In the first division, subdivision 'A', there i3 an increase of $600 to six officers who have not reached the maximum of their class. In the first division, subdivision 'B', there is a decrease of $750. The decrease is due to the fact that five of the officers who have reached the maximum salary have dropped out and their places will be filled by officers at the minimum salary.


David Henderson: What becomes of the officers who drop out? Do they go into some other branch?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, they have gone up to some other branch or have left the service. There is the wreck commissioner, one hydrographer, one chief clerk, and the commissioner of lights. In the second division subdivision ' A,' there is an increase of $2,600 which is made up as follows: One translator at $1,600 and the statutory increase of $50 to each of the officers of this class who have not reached the maximum. Three who have reached the maximum salary have dropped out and their places are to be filled by officers at the minimum salary. In the second division, subdivision 'B', there is a decrease of $1,300. In the third division, subdivision 'A', there is an increase of $700 made up

of the statutory increases of $70 to each of the officers who have not reached the maximum of their class. In the third division, subdivision 'B', there are extra siiort-hand writers at the minimum salary of this class and there is also the statutory increase of $50 to each in this class. Deducting the decreases of $2,050 there is left an increase of $2,320.


Mr. LAKE.: Is this new naval vote going to be administered by the Department of Marine and Fisheries?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Richard Stuart Lake: Will there be any increase in the staff of the department for the administration of a service which is to cost nearly $3,000,000?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Most of the officers for the administration of this naval vote will be technical officers whom the British Admiralty are kind enough to loan us for the organization of the service, and as they cannot be under the regular Civil Service Act they will have to be paid out of the vote itself.


David Henderson: That is out of the $3,000,000?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, out of the $3,000,-
000.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Do I understand the minister to say that these salaries are inclusive of the salary of the wreck commissioner?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


John Waterhouse Daniel: The wreck commissioner, I presume, is the officer who has charge of the inquiries into wrecks?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


John Waterhouse Daniel: When he does not attend himself he appoints some one else?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, not himself. The minister has the right under the law to appoint any officer of the department, or any judge, for the purpose of making these inquiries. It need not necessarily be the wreck commissioner, but generally speaking we have a man who looks after this business and who is called the wreck commissioner. When the wreck commissioner is too busy, when he is doing something else or making some other inquiries, some one else may be appointed under the law by the minister for the purpose of making an inquiry.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Then it would be the minister who would issue the instructions to be followed by the commissioner who makes the investigation into the wreck? They would not come from the wreck commissioner but from the head of the department?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There are no special instructions given. There is simply an appointment made for the purpose of making the inquiry and the inquiry is then made under the provisions of the law.
Department of Marine and Fisheries-Contingencies, $30,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is an increase of $7,000 made up as follows:	The amount
set apart for printing and stationery and other such services of the department for this current year was in excess of the amount which was voted and the expendi- .. ture would be so close as to require the cutting down of requisitions, such as for typewriters; so that we have to provide for a larger amount.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Where is this printing done?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It is done at the Printing Bureau. We send our requisitions for stationery and printing to the King's Printer, the accounts are sent to us and we have to pay them.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: As the hon. the Secretary of State (Mr. Murphy) is in his place he could possibly tell us about the contracts which aTe let outside of the Printing Bureau. We have been asking for a good deal of information with regard to a number of contracts for printing and stationery which are let by tender or in what manner they were let.


Mr. MURPHY.: I will be pleased to give my hon. friend all the information on this subject when the estimates for the Printing Bureau are up, but my present recollection of what has been done-is that there are few, if any, contracts outside of the Printing Bureau for printing.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: We were able to find just a few minutes ago where one contract was let to the Free Press of Ottawa for some $20,000 odd. Perhaps the minister can tell us whether this was let by tender or not?


Charles Murphy: Was that last year or this?


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: There was over $30,000 worth of printing done for the Department of Labour last year.


Charles Murphy: I have not the information at hand, but I will be pleased to give my hon. friend all the information when the estimates for printing are under consideration.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: The Minister of Marine and Fisheries has taken the position that the other ministers have taken this evening with regard to printing. He simply says that it is done at the Printing Bureau as far as he knows. He does not

know whether it is let by tender outside of that or not. We have been anxious to find whether the printing has been done outside of the Printing Bureau.


Mr.   MTJRPHY@: I will be pleased to give my hon. friend all the information on that point.


Mr. GEO. GORDON.: I would like to ask the Secretary of State if the printing is charged to each of the different departments at actual cost?


Charles Murphy: That is the procedure, as I understand.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Would the minister give us some idea what the $10,000 is needed for in the way of sundries?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Telephones, telegrams, newspapers and travelling expenses.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Travelling expenses if included as sundries would not appear as ' travelling expenses * in the Auditor General's Report.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is a vote for contingencies and they are taken out of that.


David Henderson: A contingency is something that is unexpected, but travelling expenses are a thing that have to be paid every year. It would look as if the word ' contingencies ' was used to cover up something. I am not saying there is anything wrong about it, but the word is misleading and does not give us an accurate idea of what the money is intended for. The minister will remember that during the past year or two a good many suspicions have been aroused, and a thing of this kind is calculated to arouse suspicion. It is in the interest of the minister I make the suggestion.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The remarks of mv hon. friend will apply to all the departments because the word ' contingencies ' is used all through the estimates.


David Henderson: I quite understand that but it does not improve the situation.


Oswald Smith Crocket: How much of this vote was for travelling expenses last year?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The accountant has not the information, but I will procure it later.
Department of Justice-Salaries (including E. L. Newcombe, $7,000), $103,498.75.


Hon. A. B. AYLESWORTH (Minister of Justice).: An additional stenographer is provided for this year to commence with a salary of $500.


David Henderson: Who decides that an extra clerk is necessary?


Allen Bristol Aylesworth: It lias been discussed with me by the deputy several times during the year as a matter of necessity. It
is within my own knowledge that this official is required, but it is entirely on his representation that I am proceeding.


David Henderson: I understand that the deputy minister recommends the appointment of a new officer. Who selects the officer?


Allen Bristol Aylesworth: The officer will be selected, of course, under the Civil Service Act by our applying for him to the Commission, and asking them to give us the name of some person competent to take this position. We have no idea who it will be.


David Henderson: Who makes the recommendation to the Civil Service Commission as to whom it should be?


Allen Bristol Aylesworth: There is no recommendation to the Civil Service Commission. They have their list of candidates who have passed the examination, and under the statute they will simply make the appointment and send the person selected to the department to enter upon the duties of the office.


David Henderson: Will it be a person who has passed the Civil Service examination or one who intends to apply for examination?


Allen Bristol Aylesworth: It must, under the statute, be some person who has already passed.


John Waterhouse Daniel: It does not follow, then, that the person who receives the most marks will get the first appointment?


William Paterson: I think it does.


Allen Bristol Aylesworth: That depends upon the manner in which the statute is administered by the Commission, and my own idea was that it would be the person who obtained the highest number of marks, if that person were willing to take that position in preference to waiting for the next one that came.


Oswald Smith Crocket: I noticed lately that the deputy minister of justice has been practising in private cases before the Supreme Court. Not long ago he appeared as counsel for the province of Nova Scotia in a case in which the province of New'Brunswick was also a party. I have heard considerable criticism as to that. I must say that it does seem to me that a gentleman occupying the position of deputy minister of justice should not practise before the Supreme Court of Canada as counsel for private parties. I do not wish to make any reflection at all on the deputy minister of justice, because he is recognized by the profession throughout the country as a very able lawyer and a very efficient minister of justice; but it did seem to me that a gentleman occupying his position should

not practise before the court as counsel for private litigants.	,


Allen Bristol Aylesworth: The subject which the hon. gentleman has mentioned is one that I am probably in no better position to say anything upon than any other member of the House. I have never considered that it was my duty or my right to investigate what may be said to be the private affairs of the gentleman who happened to be the deputy minister of the Department of Justice. I think I am in a position to certify, as matter within my own knowledge, which I have learned within the last three years if I never knew it before, that it would be very difficult to find any man able to discharge the duties of the position which Mr. Newcombe occupies, as efficiently as he discharges them; and I think I am in a position to say also that he has never in any way neglected the duties of the office which he holds, or allowed any other considerations, such as those of business or even of recreation, to interfere with the efficient and faithful doing of his work as deputy minister. To what extent he may be given by professional friends who have confidence in him, briefs in the Supreme Court, I am not able to state; I have never made examination.
I know, just as my hon. friend knows, that occasionally there is an instance of that happening; it is not very frequent. I am able to say, however, that the doing of any such work, which is outside the regular work of the department, has never been allowed by Mr. Newcombe to interfere in the least degree with full attention to the duties of his position.


Oswald Smith Crocket: I hope the Minister of Justice did not understand me as suggesting that the appearance of Mr. Newcombe before the Supreme Court rendered him any less efficient as deputy Minister of Justice. My remarks were directed entirely to the question of his practising before the courts of the country as counsel for private litigants, in view of the relation he occupies towards those courts. The salary of the deputy Minister of Justice is $7,000, is it not?


Allen Bristol Aylesworth: Yes, that is the statutory salary. As to the other items, I may say that there is no change whatever in the staff of the Supreme Court, except the statutory increases. In the Court of Exchequer an additional clerk is asked for. That clerk, the registrar says, the business of the court requires. He is to do the work of a stenographer, as the present staff of the court is not able to cope with that work without the aid from time to time of stenographers who are employed for temporary purposes. The salary of the new clerk, which it is proposed should be $2,100, is the lowest that an efficient man can be obtained for, and it-will be, perhaps not in whole Mr. CROCKET.
but in large part, met by the charges for copies of evidence, which are paid for by litigants before the court. .
Some resolutions reported.
On motion of Mr. Paterson, House adjourned at 9.35 p.m.

Monday, November 22, 1909.