[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) moved that the House again go into Committee of Supply.
Mr. JAMES KENDRY (West Peterborough).: Mr. Speaker, before we go into supply, I wish to refer to a matter which reflects on my veracity as a member of this House. I find published in the Daily Evening Review of Peterborough, a telegram from one McGregor, of the town of Peterborough, which I would ask permission to read to the House :
Auburn woollen mills have been continually running night and day during these last four years; they have employed twice as many hands and have twice as much goods of ever so much better quality than they did before. They have improved their machinery out of their earnings at least $50,000. They have been for three years too busy to close down for the taking of stock, and this is the particular period when they change from summer to winter goods, as they have to take their stock and are extensively repairing their machinery, they have laid off a few hands temporarily for that period, as stock cannot be taken and machinery repaired Whilst the mill is running at its full capacity. They are regularly paying dividends.
This telegram is supposed to have been sent by a gentleman prominently connected with the labour organization of Peterborough. Well, Mr. Speaker, I have received the following communication from Mr. J. E. Hag-gart, secretary of Union No. 672 :
The carpenters' union, No. 672, at its first regular meeting since this occurrence, desires to place the following facts on record, making clear its position in regard to this matter.
That Mr. McGregor had no authority to speak for this union.
That there is no such organization in Peter-boro' as the ' associated union ' or ' associated labourmen.'
That we fail to see in what way the cause or interests of labour were to be advanced by the statement made in the telegram, or the use that was made of it, and we, therefore, regret that the name of Peterboro's * labour union ' should have been made use of without authority, and in a connection that is more liable to cause friction and dissension among the unions and their members, and place them in a false position before the citizens of the town as regards our industrial interests.
And in doing this, the union take the occasion to express its endorsation of all reasonable efforts that have been made and are being put forth to develop Peterboro' as an industrial centre.
And hopes and trusts that all the factories we now have and which may come here in the future will enjoy prosperity and be allowed to remain under conditions that will ensure profitable operation for the capital invested and fair wages for all employed therein.
And that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the local member at Ottawa, and be read in the House of Commons.
And also sent to the local press, so as to place this union's position and the facts before the parliament of Canada and the Peterboro' public.
J. E. HAGGART, Secretary of Union No. 672.
I may say that this is a personal matter, In reference to which I made certain statements in this House. A telegram was supposed to have been sent by a gentleman who had no authority to send it; and, as it reflects on my honour as a member of the House, I wish to put myself straight with regard to the matter. The gentleman who sent the telegram had no authority to do so -if any telegram was sent. Of course, it is a question whether any such telegram was 'sent or not. But, I wish to make reference to the matter as a personal matter to myself, and I hope this will be understood.


Mr. RALPH SMITH (Vancouver).: I suppose I am entitled to say a word on this matter


James Kendry: No.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Certainly.
Mr. James Kendry, M.P.
Sir,

At the last regular meeting of Union 67 the following resolution was adopted :-
Whereas, a telegram was read by Mr. Ralp' Smith, M.P., in the House of Commons at Ot tawa, making reference to and purporting t give information in regard to one of Peterboro' industries, namely, the Auburn woollen mills, i: the name of the labour unions of the town, bein' signed by R. P. McGregor, chairman of the asso ciated unions of labourmen of Peterboro'


James Kendry: I may say, Mr. Speaker, that the matter in the telegram is not true. I have denied it in the House before, and I deny it now. I say emphatically that that statement is not true.


Ralph Smith: Mr. Speaker I am very glad that the hon. member for West Peterborough (Mr. Kendry) has brought this matter up. But. I desire to sav that the information that he has conveyed

to the House has nothing at all to do with the subject under discussion, and it certainly does not convey any information with regard to that subject. Now, Mr. McGregor, the gentleman who gave me the information that I gave to this House, was the president of the associated labour meeting that was held at Peterborough, and I was there to address the labour men.


James Kendry: Chairman of the meeting.


Ralph Smith: Yes. I sent to him asking for this information ; he sent me the information, and I read that information to the House from the openfaced telegram which came from Mr. McGregor, as chairman of the labour meeting at Peterborough. Now, the hon. member for West Peterborough reads a resolution which has been passed by a local union in Peterborough. But, does he confute a single word in the telegram ? Not a single word. This union, which, owing to certain influences, were anxious to come to the rescue of the hon. member, does not contradict a single word of the telegram read in this House. The House does not need any information as to what position Mr. McGregor holds in the labour unions of Peterborough. What hon. members want to know is, whether the information contained in the telegram which was read on the floor of this House is true or false. If it is false, why does not the labour union of Peterborough contradict the telegram ? I have a copy of the Peterborough papers here. I have been waiting for three or four days for the hon. gentleman to do what he has done, for I have seen across the floor that he was preparing for this. Now. until he can produce facts, through the influence of this labour union, to contradict the facts in the telegam, he conveys no information to the House.


Mr. T. S. SPROULE (East Grey).: I rise to a point of order. Does not the rule oblige the hon. member (Mr. Smith, Vancouver) to accept the statement of the hon. member for West Peterborough, that the information which was conveyed in the telegram read in this House was false V The hon. gentleman has made that statement emphatically. Is not the hon. gentleman from Vancouver bound to accept it 7


Mr. SPEAKER.: I was not here when the discussion referred to took place, and I do not know whether the telegram relates to a matter personal to the hon. member for West Peterborough (Mr. Kendry) or not.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It does.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: The rule is. that when a statement is made by an hon. member of this House relating to a matter which has occurred to himself, all the members of the House must accept his statement. I am


Ralph Smith: not familiar enough with the facts to know whether the telegram in question relates to a matter personal to the hon. member for Peterborough or not.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It does, because the hon. member (Mr. Kendry) is manager of the concern.


Ralph Smith: I am not discussing the point of the truthfulness of the hon. gentleman's statement in contradistinction to the statement conveyed in the telegram. I am discussing the point that the hon. gentleman has risen on to a question of privilege to discuss, a matter that does not concern this House-the position that Mr. McGregor holds with regard to the labour unions of Peterborough. If the resolution the hon. gentleman has read contradicted the statement in the telegram, I would be willing to accept the statement of the resolution. But, there is not a word to show untruthfulness in the telegram to be found in the resolution that the hon. gentleman has read. As I have said, a certain local union has attempted to come to his rescue, but they have not saved him, because they have not contradicted the statement in the telegram which I read in the House. I do not dispute the hon. gentleman's word as a member of this House ; but, when he renews a discussion on the question of the truthfulness of a statement made, the evidence he produces ought to be enough to convince hon. members that the statement is incorrect. And, if he does not do that, I do not see what his address has to do with the subject under discussion. Now, Mr. McGregor has discussed this matter in the public press of Peterborough. I have had the papers here for some days, waiting for this matter to be brought up. In these papers Mr. McGregor, over his own signature, reproduces and takes the full responsibility for this telegram, and for having sent it, and certifies to the country that the statements he made in the telegram are absolutely correct. Yet, the hon. member for West Peterborough questions the reality of the telegram. If he says frankly and openly on the floor of this House that what was stated in the telegram was not a fact, I am obliged, under the rules, to accept the statement, and will do it with good grace. But, when he brings up the question of the position that my informant hold's in relation to the labour unions of Peterborough, I have a right to complain that he has done that, and has not contradicted the facts of the telegram.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand that there are two features in this matter. The first is a statement of facts as contained in a telegram, which had reference to a subject with which the hon. member for West Peterborough was familiar, because it is the shutting down of the Auburn mills, of

which he is the manager. He denied the correctness of the statement in that telegram, and the hon. member for Vancouver (Mr. Smith) ought to have accepted that denial. The next feature is, whether Mr. McGregor was speaking as the representative of the associated labour unions of Peterborough. It now appears that there is no associated labour union in Peterborough ; therefore, Mr. McGregor could not speak a's the chairman or president or secretary of the associated labour union. The hon. member for Peterborough has shown that as well. Now, I have here the telegram that was read.


Ralph Smith: I think the demand made by the hon. member (Mr. Kendry) is fair, and I will read it again.
This was the telegram sent by Mr. McGregor :
The Auburn woollen mills have been continually running night and day during the last four years.
The hon. member for Peterborough had said that they were shut down for a long time, but in flat contradiction of his statement-


Ralph Smith: Will the hon. gentleman permit me ? I did not understand that the hon. member for Peterborough made any such denial.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: He made the statement in the House denying that they had been running night and day, denied the correctness of this statement.


Ralph Smith: I am not aware that the hon. member for Peterborough denied the several sections of that telegram. What I understood him to say was that the telegram was not correct.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Why, does he not deny the correctness of the whole of it ?


James Kendry: I deny the whole telegram, and I said so before.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: He denies the fact that he has been busy-that is one of the statements in the telegram.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: My hon. friend from Peterborough said with reference to that at the time :
Whoever gave that information to Mr. McGregor, the whole thing Is incorrect.
Yet, in face of that statement, the hon. member for Vancouver reasserts his original statement and gives the authority of Mr. McGregor. Now, then, when one section of the labour union says there is no such a thing as an associated labour union in Peterborough, and says that Mr. McGregor knows it, the hon. member for Vancouver gets up and reasserts that there is an associated labour union there, and that Mr. McGregor,
was chairman of that labour union, was there and spoke. That is denied by the labour men themselves, and they ought to be a better authority than the member for Vancouver. In the next place, Mr. McGregor is supposed to be speaking on behalf of the union regarding facts that ought to be familiar to the union. These facts are denied, or what he was pleased to call facts.


Ralph Smith: I would like to ask the hon. member if he can prove to this House that there is in this resolution that has been read by the hon. member a denial of any single statement in the telegram.
Mi-. SPROULE. The hon. member for Peterborough has first denied it in this House, and afterwards he has denied the correctness of the telegram that the member for Vancouver read; and in the face of these two denials the member for Vancouver gets up and endeavours to bolster up a statement that the member who is affected by it emphatically denies to be correct.


Ralph Smith: I understood the hon. gentleman to say that the resolution read by the hon. member for Peterborough denied the facts of that telegram. Now, I want an answer from him-does the resolution of that union deny the facts of that telegram ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The resolution of the union says that no such union exists-that is a denial of it. Therefore, if no such union exists, they cannot have sent the telegram. In addition to that, my hon. friend from Peterborough denies the correctness of the telegram, says it is absolutely untrue; he knows it for a fact, because he is the manager of the mills, and no man could know better whether they were shut down or not. The member for Vancouver read a telegram saying that they were working consecutively for four years, while only two minutes before that the member for Vancouver said that these mills were shut down during the election, and that the member for Peterborough had previously said that if the present government was returned to power they would not be reopened.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The hon. gentleman is out of order.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am not going to refer any further to that; I do not think it is necessary to call the Speaker's attention to it. I am only giving information in reference to that allegation of fact of the member for Vancouver. I say with regard to the allegation of fact contained in that telegram which my hon. friend has denied, that it is a question that affects the veracity of the hon. member for Peterborough as a member of this House. When my hon.

friend emphatically denies that statement the hon. member for Vancouver is bound to accept it.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: So far as there is any matter of personal explanation it must be between the hon. member for Peterborough and the hon. member for Vancouver, and as they have both been heard in personal explanation, the matter must be considered at an end. Anything more is a reference to past debates, which we cannot enter into.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I would simply ask hon. members not to refer to a previous debate, because it will be certainly out of order.


Mr. A. B. INGRAM (East Elgin).: I wish to say a few words, and if I am out of order I will soon place myself in order. I am rather surprised at the position taken by the hon. member for Vancouver, a gentleman who,, I understand, was elected as an independent member of this House. But, judging from the way in which he has discussed this question, I think he is more desirous of preserving his party interests than he is the independent interests he was elected to support. The hon. gentleman professes to be a leader of a labour organization in this country, and he has palmed off on this House a telegram signed by one McGregor, as a president of the labour association.


Mr. FLINT.: I rise to a question of order. The hon. gentleman says that my hon. friend from Vancouver ' palmed ' off on this House a telegram. I object to that word.


Andrew B. Ingram: If it is any satisfaction to the hon. gentleman, I will say that the member for Vancouver read a telegram from Mr. McGregor, who, I suppose, misrepresented himself as president of a labour association that was not in existence; and the member for Vancouver, who has taken some part in labour organizations, knows perfectly well [DOT]that any person occupying the position of chairman at a labour meeting does not constitute the president of a labour association. The hon. gentleman knows that perfectly well, yet he reads in this House a telegram signed by a person presumed to occupy that position, a false position. Now, what does this document say ?
Mr. McGregor had no authority to speak for this union.
Who is Mr. McGregor ? A carpenter in the city of Peterborough, a gentleman who has no personal knowledge of the institution managed and controlled by my hon. friend from Peterborough.
That there is no such organization in Peterborough as the associated union, or associated labour union.
And that is true, and there is no bon. gentleman in this House who ought to know it better than the hon. member for Vancouver.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then, when the hon. gentleman who manages and is part owner of this concern makes a statement and says that the telegram signed by Mr. McGregor is not a correct telegram, does not give the correct facts of the case, the hon. member for Vancouver had not courtesy enough to accept the word of my hon. friend from Peterborough. Now, I would like to ask the hon. gentleman who has been associated with labour organizations, does he mean to tell this House that a carpenter who was never inside of that factory, who knows nothing of the work of the factory, is in a position to give a correct statement of facts in regard to the factory ? The hon. gentleman will not pretend to say that, and yet, for the sake of clinching his argument, as he thought at that time, he produced this telegram sent by Mr. McGregor. Who is Mr. McGregor ? Mr. McGregor is a prominent Liberal in the city of Peterborough and takes an active part in political campaigns in Peterborough. Now, I say the hon. member for Vancouver, as an independent member, was inconsistent when he accepted the words of the telegram coming from an active partisan and politician in Peterborough in order to prove his case.


Ralph Smith: The hon. gentleman will excuse me. This is information to me, I never knew before this minute that Mr. McGregor was a Liberal.


Andrew B. Ingram: I have always noticed that when an hon. gentleman of independent proclivities finds himself in a tight box, he always says that he knows nothing of party politics. Now, my hon. friend from Peterborough has been a good many years in this House, he is a gentleman who is not in the habit of occupying much of the time of the House; and I think hon. members on both sides will agree with me when I say that when my hon. friend from Peterborough has anything to say in this House he has in the past been found to be pretty accurate in the statements he makes. In the debate on the budget he, like other hon. gentlemen in this House, differed, it i^ true, from some of the other members in his views; but I believe we can give him credit at least for being honest in his desire to discuss questions in the light in which he sees them, and not for the purpose of misrepresenting facts. I would say in conclusion, that if independent members of this House take a stand on what I believe to be an active partisan basis they cannot blame an hon. gentleman on the government side or an hon. gentleman on this side of the House, for standing up and advocating what he believes the true principles of his party. I think this can be fairly excused, but I do not think it can be excused when it comes from an hon. member who professes to be independent and to hold pure and enlightened independent views.



THE MILITIA.

Mr. A. T. THOMPSON (Haldimand and Monck).: Some days ago I had occasion to make a few remarks upon the subject of a retiring allowance for the officers and men of the permanent militia of Canada, and upon that occasion I said that at some future date I would ask the indulgence of the House while I discussed matters appertaining to the militia of Canada. I do not believe that I need apologize for taking such a course as this to-day. I understand that we are about to go into Committee of Supply, and that the militia estimates are to be taken up, and so, I think, the time is suitable. Now, I have abstained throughout the session from taking any part in the discussion of questions of transportation, of trade and commerce and of many others that have engaged the attention of the House. I have done this designedly, because I knew how little my own knowledge was in connection with these matters. So far as the militia of Canada goes, however, I may claim to know something about that, although I admit not nearly as much as I would like to know. For fourteen years I have been closely connected with the militia of Canada, first, as a full private in the rear rank of a crack city regiment, the Queen's Own Rifles of Toronto, and in the end, in command of a regiment which I may fairly claim is a crack country one, the 37th Haldimand Regiment of Rifles. I have been enabled to gather what are the requirements of a city and a country corps, and so I feel that I will be able * to contribute something to the knowledge of hon. members in connection with matters appertaining to the militia. We have spent a great deal of time and money in developing the various natural resources of Canada, in developing our waterways and railways, and from time to time, we are building up new plaees in this young country. Of what good are all these things unless we have a force able and willing to defend them against the strong hand of aggression which we find in the 20th century, as in centuries gone by, is ready to reach out and grasp the property of those countries whose weakness marks them out as their prey. It is a fact that I think is too little known that the militia of Canada comprises more people than any other organization no matter how great the trust may be in this country. Almost every hon. member of this House is a Canadian militiaman, all from eighteen to sixty years of age are members of the Canadian militia, not of the active force, but of the reserve force, and so a militia debate should be of great interest to the people in general. It is perhaps very little known that should our supply of volunteer militiamen become inadequate there is such a thing as compulsory service by ballot, and many of those who
take but a scant interest in the militia may find themselves under the necessity of joining the colours. In our militia organization there is what is known as the skeleton system. We have in each company a sufficient number of officers to officer a company on a war footing, according to the British army standard, but, as for the rank and file, we are allowed only two-fifths of full strength. Our own force, which is only 3G,000 strong, would have to be immensely increased in time of serious trouble, and the increase would have to come from those very people, who, at present, take far more interest in the price of binder twine, or of coal oil, or in the discovery of the North Pole, which is still as much undiscovered as an efficient militia is undiscovered. The ranks will have to be filled up from those very people, and it is a great pity that hon. members and the people in general do not take a more sympathetic interest in the militia of Canada. Now, passing from generalities to particulars ; let me refer to the subject of increased pay for our militia. At present the militiaman- I speak of the rank and file-has to go into camp at a daily wage of 50 cents, and this at the time of year when labour is plentiful and very well paid indeed. You may readily see the sacrifice that entails. In many cases so inadequate is this pay supplied by the government, that county councils, in their generosity, have supplemented the pay by giving 25 cents a day, and in some cases 50 cents a day increase to each man in the regiment which bears their county name. This is a great mistake. In the first place the county is undertaking a duty which properly belongs to the government of Canada, and in the second place it almost invariably happens that sooner or later the generous county council is superseded by the parsimonious county council which withdraws that pay, and in the end the recipient regiment is far worse off than at first. It is not providing a remedy which will accrue to the benefit of the militia. What is the result of this inadequate pay ? Inadequate physique is the result. It is a matter which anybody can readily appreciate, when I say that on pay like that only very young and undeveloped men can go to the camp. As men grow older it is the history of our people that they take unto themselves partners for life, and having done so, I am sorry to say they generally divorce themselves from the militia of Canada. They cannot afford to go to camp and make this financial sacrifice, when they have become family men, with all the responsibilities which that relation entails, and therefore, our regiments have to be filled up with mere youths who would, on a war footing, be entirely unequal to the exigencies and hardships of the campaign. The Major General in his annual report has spoken of the wastage of our Canadian

militia. By that he means this: every militiaman, when he joins his regiment, is sworn to serve for three years, but many of them go to the first camp, and the first camp only. They receive a certain amount of drill, they become, to a certain extent, efficient, very efficient indeed, for the length of time in which they are in the regiment, but after going back from the first camp they do not come to the second or the third camp. The Major General suggests that some of these men should be made an example of, that they should be arrested and prosecuted for not coming to the second or third camps. Here, most respectfully, I wish to take issue with him. I think, after a great deal of experience in recruiting, which is the main difficulty in the militia, I can assure him that if we adopted such a drastic course as that, we might as well disband the militia. There is, to my mind, a very much better remedy, and it is to increase the pay on a graded scale. My proposition is that the first year a soldier goes to camp he shall receive 50 cents per day, for the second camp he shall receive 65 cents a day, and for the third and subsequent camps he shall receive 75 cents a day. If we had a graded system of that kind, I believe that all the complaints of immaturity on the part of the men and wastage of which the Major General has spoken, would rapidly disappear. Here let me come to a matter which is small perhaps in itself, but it is an injustice, and no injustice is too small to talk about until such time as it is remedied. We are authorized to have, for every corps in Canada, a regimental chaplain, and very many of the regiments have availed themselves of it, and have a regimental chaplain. I may say that no man in camp does more good to the militia than the chaplain. His presence tends to better discipline, clean living, to a lack of riotousness of all kinds, and more especially his presence immensely helps to remove one of those difficulties we have to contend with on the part of parents who have the very erroneous idea that the camp is a wild and wicked place. One of the chief difficulties we have to contend with is on the part of parents who have the very erroneous idea that a militia camp is a wicked and demoralizing place. When we are able to tell them that we have with us a regimental chaplain, that difficulty generally disappears, and we have their consent to enlist their sons. Hon. gentlemen will be surprised when I say that amongst all the militia we have enrolled in Canada, the regimental chaplain is the only man who draws not one cent of pay. He actually has to go to camp and pay his own mess bill. He lias not a single cent from the government with which to defray his actual expenses, or supply uniform. I mentioned this once to a gentleman high in militia circles and he gave me a reply that I thought was very inadequate, namely, that Mr. THOMPSON.
they did not do it in England. That is a very poor excuse. Father O'Leary and his brave brethren of the cloth have demonstrated on the battlefields of South Africa that they can be to the men of great assistance in matters temporal as well as spiritual. It is a disgrace to the generosity of Canada and to the militia system of Canada that the chaplain should go one day longer unpaid. I trust sincerely that the Minister of Militia will take this into consideration and that the next camp we go to, the regimental chaplain will not be asked to give his service gratis.
Closely allied toj the subject of increased pay is that of increased comforts to the men. A very few thousand dollars would provide mess tents for the men in camp. I believe that $200 a regiment would afford suitable marquees. It has been said that this is a strange thing to suggest, that this is making the soldiers too luxurious, that on active service there would be no such thing as mess tents. That I grant you. But, if you increase the comforts of the men you increase the facilities for getting recruits. Would gentlemen go so far as to say that because on active service, very often a soldier has to do without a tent at night, that therefore we should have no tents ? Are we to be asked to inoculate rheumatism, so to speak, simply because on active service the fellows have to sleep out at nights and without tents ? I think not. We in the militia have had enough to put up with in years gone by; we have been subjected to indifference or insult running the gamut from the good-natured shrug to the open sneer. Now; thanks to the service rendered by our brave boys in South Africa, thanks to the service of such men as Ivnisley of my own corps, who, going to South Africa an immature soldier, came back recommended for the Victoria Cross.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Andrew Thorburn Thompson: ment going to South Africa could not act. alone, that the regiinentj would have to he broken up, that each company would have to he attached to a British line regiment until it received its baptism of fire ; and, yet, Sir, that Canadian regiment was not broken up, and I do not think that any British line regiment has made for itself a record more glorious. Conning to the matter of central armouries, I am therefore going to take issue with some high in authority in our permanent forces in Canada. For myself-,1 am speaking now of rural corps-I do not believe In central armouries. I think they are a very great mistake. The old system was to have a small armoury at the headquarters of each company. That has done good in many ways. It has increased the local pride of the militia organization in the neighbourhood, with the result that the local company had better recruiting. But now, with the central armouries, what are we going to have ? I know of onel county in which a central armoury is to be established at the most southern end of it, and it will be eighty miles from that armoury to the furthest outlying company. The arms are all to be kept there. What will be the result ? Three or four days before camp the arms will be issued to the men so that they may handle them a little and march into camp not quite so much like a mob as they otherwise would be. Immediately after camp, on the day of the soldiers home-coming these arms will all be turned back into the central armoury. They will be oiled and put away in glass cases, so to speak, and in ten or fifteen years, if history repeats Itself as history always has done, these arms will be as obsolete as the Snider rifle is to-day, and we will have in Canada thousands upon thousands of rifles which will be of use only as curiosities or for scrap iron. One of' the chief arguments for the central armoury is that the new rifle being of such delicate mechanism it is not safe any longer to trust it to the care of any one except at headquarters. My experience of those in command of companies is that they are careful and reliable men and that they can very well take care of these rifles. Anyway, Mr. Speaker. I think that it would he better that some of these rifles were destroyed in the handling, so long as they be bandied and our men get some familiarity with them, than that the state of things that I have described should come to pass when in a few years these rifles become obsolete and useless, and when in the meantime if some trouble overtake us, we have to send our men to the front without any knowledge whatever of the rifle of the day. I am aware that the establishment of rifle clubs will do something towards obviating this difficulty, but it will not do all. for in many places where there are company headquarters they will not, I think, be able to get the
requisite number of men. If the men had the convenient use of the rifles, then they would at least get accustomed to handling them, which is after all half the battle. There are many, protests against the great expenditure for central armouries in cities. I am not speaking with one bit of malice towards the cities. They have splendid military organizations and I give them all credit for that, but I fail to see why they should have such expensive armouries as many of them have. I know a country corps, the 3tth Regiment, and I speak of it with pleasure, which is soon to have a central armoury at a cost of how much do you think ? $1,GOO. But a city with perhaps two or three regiments requires the erection of an armoury that will cost $100,000. Can you tell me that this is In the interests of the militia ? It is nothing of the kind. It is just simply done to beautify the city or the town in which that expensive public building is put up. I say that in this time when money is so hard to get for the militia of Canada, it would be far better to erect less expensive armouries in the cities and to devote the balance of the money to rifle shooting and to practice in field exercise so that our fellows may be better prepared when the time comes, as it is bound to come, when they will have to go to the front again.
Next, Sir, I come to the question of mounted infantry. I must beg the indulgence of the House because I am afraid I am going to speak at much greater length than I intended.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Go on. You are doing well.


Andrew Thorburn Thompson: I will next take up the question of mounted infantry. ' The speed of an army is the speed of its slowest man,' is a saying that is centuries older than the Boer war. It is amusing to read newspaper comments about the lessons we have learned from the Boer war. There is nothing new under the sun, and I think we have learned very little that is new from that war. What the Boer war has done for us is this : It has repeated lessons which we were beginning to forget, and therein lies its value to us. It has impressed on us the value of mobility. That was recognized centuries ago. So far back as when the Crusaders went out to fight the Saracens they found that though stronger and more powerful, yet mounted on their heavy armoured horses, they were not able to compete with the light-armed Saracens who moved rapidly. We have in Canada the greatest opportunity for mounted infantry that any country in the world possesses, I believe. Canada to-day is in many respect similar to South Africa. We have an immense territory, we have a boundary line of enormous length, we have a population sparse in comparison

with that area and in its distribution rural rather than urban. We have thousands and thousands of good horses and thousands and thousands of farmers' sons to ride them, and yet up to this time we have not inactive organization a single company or squadron of mounted infantry. Some are authorized, some soon will be in existence, but not one-twentieth part of what we require. Here, again, I take issue with th^ opinion of experts. I believe that a company of mounted infantry should be attached to every infantry regiment in Canada ; every rural corps at least. And, if it is necessary that this mounted Infantry should practice in greater numbers than in one company at a time, when the rural regiments go to camp let the mounted companies be detached from them for drill purposes in that camp and then after the camp rejoin their regiments. I can tell you that we would put only the picked men in these companies of mounted rifles. It would be a matter of policy to put the best men into the mounted companies, and the result woulcl be emulation and increased efficiency in the dismounted men. The men would thus learn something of mounted work, and in each regiment there would be a lump to leaven the whole, when in war time it might become necessary to Increase our mounted force by converting several corps of infantry into mounted infantry.
On the subject of transport I do not intend to say anything, for X have learned, and with very great pleasure, that something is to be done towards the establishment of a transport. Hitherto we have had practically nothing at all in that direction; but I believe that an officer who is able and experienced, and who served in the South African war with the express purpose of gaining the necessary knowledge, is to be appointed at the head of a Canadian army transport corps, and the minister has moved in the right direction in establishing an army medical staff.
Next, X come to a subject which is equally interesting to that of the mounted rifles, viz., rifle shooting, and first as to the present insufficiency of ammunition. What can we do on an allowance of 40 rounds a year ? In the British army they fire several hundred rounds, and in the United States anywhere from 600 to 1,000 rounds a year. And those 40 rounds we have, too frequently, to fire in camp under the injunction, * Hurry up, boys, or we won't get through before dark ; there is another regiment coming on the ground.' Days are spent at squad drill, when we might have another day at the butts with more advantage. This ammunition is not expensive. It only costs $29 per thousand rounds; so that if you doubled the supply of ammunition in camp, you would only Increase the expenditure by some $40,000, a mere bagatelle in comparison with the increased efficiency it would produce.


Andrew Thorburn Thompson: Then, we have insufficient ranges. 1 would like to see some of the money now squandered on too luxurious city armouries devoted to the establishment of ranges throughout the country, so that every man might learn to shoot. Something is being done in that direction, and more I hope will, be done. I would like to see the door thrown wide open. Every trained shot is an asset to the country, whether a member of the active militia or not. I have no sympathy with the distinction which is drawn between the active militia and the reserve militia. Switzerland bristles like a porcupine, not simply because it is a country of mountains, but because every man in the country can use his rifle, and the combined armies of Europe to-day would find it difficult to overrun Switzerland; if Canadians could only be trained in time of peace to use their rifles, we would be an awfully hard nut to crack in time of trouble.
We have iu Canada these disadvantages in connection with rifle shooting; but we have natural advantages which very few other countries enjoy. In the first place, the South African war demonstrated that the city men from London or Manchester were no match for the countrymen from the downs of Devon or the Highlands of Scotland. The city man, living among high buildings, where his vision is limited, is likely to be somewhat short-sighted; but the countryman, accustomed to an environment which gives his eyesight a longer range, is more efficient at long range shooting. In Canada we have no greatly congested centres. Our population is a rural population, and has that excellent sight, requisite to good shooting, and that fresh air and exercise which produces an iron constitution, which knows no nerves; for the nervous man will not make a very good rifle shot. In England the country is so crowded that it is very difficult to find places for rifle ranges, except on the sea coast, where there is no danger to life. But in Canada there is no country where we could not find space for a 600 yards range in each township, and I am informed that while a range of this length is not quite all that could be desired, it is nevertheless capable of giving very good training.
I have a word to say with reference to the duty of the citizens of this country generally. While the government can give us cheap ammunition, good and plentiful, and rifle ranges, after that the citizens have to take the burdens on their shoulders. I sometimes think that in Canada we suffer too much from hysterical patriotism. Men who feel downcast when news of a reverse come to us, drape their houses with bunting and cheer wildly when news of success arrives ; but just as soon as the newness of war is over, they backslide, and if you want a son or employee of theirs to go to camp or tlie butts, they will not allow it, because forsooth if he went they would have for a

short time a few hours more work to do. Yet, these men consider themselves patriots. Truly, self-deception is easy, hut it is also as dangerous as easy. We members of parliament have a great deal to do in educating the opinion of the country. Whether we belong to the active or the reserve militia-and I welcome all as brethren in the force who are willing to admit that they are not over sixty years of age-we have a duty to perform. When we go back to our constituencies, let us put our shoulders to the wheel, and encourage our local regiments and the rifle clubs which are to be formed in every part of Canada. I do not want to lecture the House, which I find young members are sometimes accused of doing; but I desire to arouse the interest of hon. members on this question. I have sat in my seat and felt heavy-hearted when I have heard an hon. member making an excellent speech on a militia subject and not ten men in the House listening to him. It would be an impertinence on my part to criticise the members; but I will say, as Green said, speaking of the writings of King James I., that hon. gentlemen are will-ling to discuss anything ranging from predestination to tobacco, except the question of the militia of Canada. But I hope that when such a question is before the House hereafter, every member of the militia, whether belonging to the active or the reserve force, will take the pains to go to the library and read up on it, and give the House the benefit of his brains on that as on every other subject. I do not wish to see fastened on Canada the military burdens of the old land. We do not wish the country to spend on a single regiment, what our government has spent to maintain the garrison at Halifax, $350,000 for a single year. A permanent corps of 10,000 men would cost twice as much as 35,000 active militia and still be too small as a garrison. But we do not want a large permanent force. We want a permanent force just large enough to supply good teachers for the rest, and we must develop in the best possible way our citizen soldiers.
I wish to say something with regard to the relative sacrifices of the city and the country corps. The city men look rather askance at their country brethren, but let me say a word for the boys on the side lines, whose sacrifices are just as great as those of the city men. It is true, the city men draw no pay, but turn what they receive into the regimental fund; but these city men do their drill at night, after they have earned their day's pay at their usual avocations. The countryman on the other hand has to go into camp and become entirely dissociated from his usual business, and he draws 50 cents a day, when he could make at home $1.25 a day. And, therefore, I think I have demonstrated that the sacrifice which he is making is, in dollars and cents, fully equal to that of his brother in the city.
The hon. member for Victoria, B.O., (Hon. Mr. Prior), in a speech made this week, mentioned the fact that in case we should require a large supply of rifles for any emergency, we could not get them from England, because she has no reserve supply. I know that we must not move too quickly, that we must make haste 'slowly in matters of this kind, especially as the campaign has to be largely an educative one, but, I believe that before long we should take up seriously not only the establishment of a second cartridge factory in Canada, but also of a factory for the manufacture of our own rifles. The money would be spent in Canada, and we would not be dependent on the old land at the very time when we needed the arms to be put into the hands of our numerous soldiers.
I know that I have criticised a good deal, but have done so in the best of good spirit. I know, too, that our militia has been improving of late years, and I wish to give to the hon. the Minister of Militia the credit which, I think, is only his due. He has given us an annual instead of bi-annual drill. If there ever was money absolutely thrown into the river, it was the money paid out for the drilling of only one-half the militia each year. To a large extent we had only a militia on paper, something to deceive us, and of little worth. But since we have had an annual camp drill, our militia, though still far from perfect, is fast becoming at least respectable, and no one measure has contributed so much to that change as the annual camp drill. Yet, in conversation with some hon. gentlemen not long ago, the suggestion was made, that possibly we might like to go back to the old system. I do not believe that such an opinion prevails to any extent. and if such a proposal should ever be made, we would have a debate that would be dragged out to the limits of a gerrymander discussion. For I am pretty confident that the members of the militia who have seats in this House, would fight very long before they would submit to the destruction of a system under which our militia is making very considerable progress towards efficiency. The Minister of Militia is also entitled to credit for having established an army medical staff, in which are enrolled some of the best surgeons in the country. Another thing which the South African war has demonstrated is, that the civilian surgeon is a far better man at the front than the army surgeon. The reason is obvious. Nine out of ten army surgeons have nothing to do until the men go into battle, and come pouring in wounded, whereas the civilian is almost always actively engaged in his work, and, consequently, has greater opportunities to perfect himself, and acquires greater skill than the permanent surgeon of the army. In Canada, we have succeeded in enrolling in the medical staff some of the best surgeons in the country, and that is one of the best things

that could be done for the comfort of the men who go Into active service. And, besides the transport corps of which I have spoken, the engineering staff, which is very inadequate in point of numbers, is being increased, and a corps of engineers established in connection with the engineering branches of the McGill and Toronto universities, which will be of very great service also.
One word in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, and I have done. I would appeal to the patriotism of this House against partisanship in militia matters. We glory in the fact that we keep politics, very largely at least, off the bench, and have a pure judiciary in Canada. The only justification for the existence of our militia is the possibility of our requiring them on active service, and, therefore, this is a matter so sacred that we should drop politics from it, and all stand together for the militia force of Canada. I have met many Conservative members opposite. Would it be impertinent for me to say that they are a jolly good lot of fellows, whose patriotism is far ahead of their party-ism, just a's it is on this side of the House. I believe that in the main we are all good Canadians, and I hope that when the Minister of Militia introduces anything which we may conclude, after discussion, is in the interests of the militia, hon. members opposite will support it just as readily as though the motion were not introduced by a minister of the Crown.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the House went into Committee of Supply.
Pay and allowance of militia, $389,609.
The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The increase of $8,515 is made up of the following items :	The pay of the
headquarters and district staff is increased from $38,094 to $41,609. This is due to the establishment of a school of musketry, witli an inspector of musketry, who will receive a salary of $2,800. Last year there was an item of $3,200 for the officer commanding the Canadian artillery, Col. Stone. His services terminated, and this year it is not necessary to vote that sum. But, as I have just said, there is added an inspector of musketry, who will command the new school of musketry, at a salary of $2,800. Then, the officer who will take charge of the army service corps, which is to be organized, will have a salary of $2,000. There are to be two brigade majors or district staff officers appointed at the usual salary of $1,200 each.


Hon. Mr. TISDALE.: Will the hon. gentleman explain this musketry school and army service corps, and what need there is for these two additional brigade majors.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The musketry school is to be


Andrew Thorburn Thompson: organized on the lines of the Hythe school in England. I have here the proposal in detail, placed in my hands by the general officer commanding, of which I suppose I need only give a brief synopsis. It is to be called the Royal Canadian School of Musketry. It is to be located at Ottawa. The staff of the school will consist of a commandant and chief instructor, who shall also be inspector of musketry for the Dominion, with the status and pay of an assistant adjutant general at headquarters. His duties will be not only to take charge of the school, of which there are to be three terms during the year, but, at times when he is not engaged here he is to go through the country and inspect the different regiments and the rifle associations which we expect will be formed and make reports with regard to their efficiency, and see that they are doing their [DOT]work properly. There will also be two sergeant instructors, these will be taken from the permanent force and, therefore, will not entail any additional charge upon the country.
That for the present a class should consist of twelve officers, viz.: Two field officers, four captains and six subalterns, and eighteen noncommissioned officers not below the rank of a corporal; total, thirty. Commanding officers, when recommending candidates to attend the school, must certify that they are thoroughly proficient in the ' firing exercises,' and practically acquainted with all the parts and mechanism of the rifle, Lee-Enfield.
There should be three classes annually, each lasting for about six weeks, the first to commence about the middle of May or as soon afterwards as the range can be used.
A sufficient number of targets on the Rock-liffe ranges shall be placed at the disposal of the musketry school daily up to 12 noon.
It would be necessary to provide two rooms in the Ilockliffe pavilion, one for office and the other for lecture room, with desks and seats for the students (removable), and also to construct a hut to accommodate twenty sergeants, with sleeping and dining rooms and lavatory.
The officer students to receive the usual lodging allowance of their rank. The pavilion has a good kitchen with a range, capable of cooking for any number of men, which would be available if the living hut were constructed close to or as an annex to the existing building.
That is the building now on the Rockliffe range.
Certificates.-There would be two classes of certificates, 'ordinary' and 'extra'; and no subaltern officer should, in the future, be promoted to captain nor captain promoted to major vho is not in possession of an ordinary musketry certificate.
I do not know that there is anything further to say. If further explanations are required, I shall be glad to give them.


Hon. Mr. PRIOR.: According to what the minister has stated, it seems to me the country is going to be put to large expense in starting a musketry establishment. I

do not know that I am competent to give an opinion of this matter, but it seems to me that the result could be gained with a great deal less expense to the country than we shall have under the prox>osed system. There is no need, so far as I can make out from what has been stated to me by officers competent to judge, for a musketry school to be established in this country. It seems to me that if arrangements were made to provide more ammunition for the different regiments, the same results would be secured without having these officers appointed and large salaries paid, with lecture rooms and so on at Rockliffe and other places. I think much can be done by disregarding technical and scientific details, as we see in a school carried on in Montreal. I happened to be there, and saw the school that is being carried on by Col. Peters. A lot of detail is left out which was formerly thought necessary to the training of a soldier, and in two or three days the men were able to perform the movements as well as if they had been trained four months in the old way. I think the same principle obtains in rifle shooting. Instead of giving a lot of scientific details about the trajectory and so on, if the men were shown how to aim at short distances and gradually taken back, being taught how to handle their rifles practically instead of being put through a lot of theoretical work, I think the results would be attained with a great deal less expense than under the system outlined by the hon. minister. I may be wrong, but I venture this opinion ; and I know that it is the opinion of hundreds of other officers in the Dominion. I do not think that such a school as has been set forth by the minister is needed, with an inspector having the salary, if i understood the minister, of an adjutant general


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Assistant adjutant general.


Edward Gawler Prior: Would he inspect the different regiments when they are out in camp and the city corps at any time when they could be called upon to appear and shoot on the ranges, or how is he going to inspect them for shooting ? Or is he only to inspect the books showing the results of rifle shooting ? It seems to me, as I said before, that if more ammunition was given to the different regiments, and it was left to the officers to train their own men, it would be better than to have a school of this kind.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I think my hon. friend (Hon. Mr. Prior) has drawn somewhat upon his im-magination when lie talks about the very great increased cost. There are no highly paid officers but one. The assistants will be drawn, as I have said, from the permanent force.
Hon. Mr. PRIOR, Will the hon. minister read again what he stated with regard to the number of officers that form the school.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: These are the students-pupils- who are to be drawn from every part of the active militia to attend this school, and be taught, just as they come to the different depots of the permanent force now.


Edward Gawler Prior: I did not understand that.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: That is the whole object. There will be only one officer-the head of the school. The other officers will be drawn, whenever necessary, from the permanent force.


Edward Gawler Prior: These officers are supposed to be brought to the schools to be instructed so that they may instruct their men ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Quite so.


David Tisdale: If I understood the hon. minister's explanation correctly, this will be a second qualification which officers must have ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Yes, an additional qualification.


David Tisdale: Will they come here at their own expense ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: They will come exactly on the same basis as that on which they go to the permanent force schools. There will be the same allowance.


David Tisdale: What is the allowance ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: A dollar a day.


David Tisdale: And they pay their own expenses ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Yes, except that, as the hon. gentleman knows, there is a vote which we shall come to presently, out of which the expenses of transport, &c\, are paid, and this vote will be utilized for the transport of officers to this school exactly as in the case of the other depots. In fact, this is practically the establishment of another depot, but for the purpose of teaching rifle shooting.


David Tisdale: They get transportation and a dollar a day, and they simply loose their time ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: That is all.


David Tisdale: And the certificate will be required of any officer above a certain rank ?


Tlie MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: No.


David Tisdale: As I understood, after he passes the school and gets his necessary qualification to be gazetted, before he gets promotion he must also get his certificate from this musketry school of instruction.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Precisely. No subaltern should in future, according to the recommendation of the general, be promoted captain, nor a captain be promoted major, who is not in possession of an ordinary musketry certificate.


David Tisdale: The subalterns do not require this except when they pass from that rank.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Precisely.


David Tisdale: I do not intend to follow the remarks made by the hon. member for Haldimand (Mr. Thompson), because I have not been in the force for a good many years, though I still take some interest in it. Nor have I followed with the same care as the hon. member for Victoria (Mr. Hughes) has done the different changes that have been made. But there was one criticism that he omitted to make, and possibly it is the greatest difficulty we have to meet in the volunteer militia, and that is to get officers to qualify. I see nothing, either in the general's report or in any of the remarks of the minister, that tends to remove that difficulty. I agree that it is necessary if possible to have qualified officers. In my day, and for many years, I knew something about that when I was in command of a regiment, and I notice now that instead of decreasing, that difficulty seems to be increasing. Ln those days there were no schools in existence, the men went before the regular officers and had a school established on the old plan, or what was known as a board. In those days, where I live, we had more qualified officers, according to my knowledge of the regiments, than we have to-day. But no doubt qualification in musketry Instruction is excellent, and I would be prepared to support any reasonable expenditure in order to give it. The query to my mind is whether bringing them all the way down to Ottawa from all parts of the Dominion is going to induce the officers to go to the expense of qualifying. I find now in many of the rural battalions there are very few actually qualified officers. So far as my knowledge goes of some of them there is only one really good qualified officer to a company, and some companies turn out


Mr. BORDEN (King's).: without any. Therefore, in framing new regulations, I think it would be well to consider that proposition, before adopting the recommendation of the general officer, whose recommendations, of course, to a large extent, are expected to prevail. It may be possible there is no other plan than to make a central school. I agree with the hon. member for Victoria, B.C. (Hon. Mr. Prior), that what we should aim at is simplicity of instruction of the capable men we have, who will take it up quickly, the department making as little circumlocution as possible. In the explanations of the minister, the first point that strikes me is that you will have great difficulty tin getting captains, because I fear that many of them are not likely to take the time necessary to go ,so far. As the minister says, the expense is not as great for establishing the school as proposed. There is one thing more I wish to say, and I am sure the minister and the staff will accept it in the spirit In which it is said. I am blaming neither the officers nor the staff, but it has always seemed to me that there was not quite enough of sympathy, or of what I call touch, between the staff and the officers all over the country. I do not mean to say that there is anything ap-proaphing a lack of confidence between them ; but yet the staff seem to be a little too distinctive from the others. The militia officers feel that they are being treated too much as if it was desired to make regular soldiers of them, when it is not possible for them to be regular soldiers. Probably the formation of this school is the best method that can be adopted. But certainly I fear that even under this plan the department will fail to get the requisite number of captains in the country, and if there is any possible way of obviating that difficulty I would be glad to have some one suggest it.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I am sure I would be very unreasonable indeed if I were to find fault with my hon. friend's criticism. I have had the pleasure of sitting in the House for many years with him, and I am bound to say there is no more reasonable man in presenting criticism than that hon. gentleman. There is no doubt a great deal of force in what he says. He will concur with what I said with regard to the regulations proposed, but they were only a suggestion on the part of the general, the matter has not been settled. I think there is so much force iu what my hon. friend says that the requirement of this qualification should perhaps be restricted to field officers. An adjutant might be required to have that qualification, or perhaps one of the majors ; certainly I think the commanding officer of a battalion ought to be required to have it. Below that rank, what is done now might be continued iu many cases. To-day, to some extent, we remove the schools to the officers-in a case where there is a large number of officers

who find it Impossible to attend. Although I think it would be better for them to go, still, if there is a hardship and they find it impossible to attend a school, it would be well to move the school. I believe there is to be one established here in the city of Ottawa shortly ; there is one, as my hon. friend from Victoria has mentioned, now going on in the city of Montreal. Although we may still be called upon to do something of that kind, I believe that nothing that has been done in the militia for many years will confer as great benefits for the small amount of money expended as the establishment of this central school. At any rate, it won't cost us much to try it. We will have incurred no expenditure which will be wasted ; if, at the end of the year, we find it does not work, it is a very easy matter to give it up. My hon. friend referred to the importance of qualified officers ; he referred to the fact that many years ago there were more qualified officers than there are to-day, relatively to the population. That is quite correct. There is no doubt about that, but I must remind my hon. friend that at the time he speaks of, which I remember distinctly, the whole country was a part of the active militia. There was as large a militia force in the province of Nova Scotia in I860 as there is in the whole Dominion of Canada to-day, a larger force because there was a militia of forty thousand ready to be placed in arms in the province of Nova Scotia at that time, and, of course, we had to have qualified officers to command them. But, I think, I may say to my hon. friend, and to the committee, for the encouragement of the country at large, that there is to-day a very much larger number of qualified officers in Canada than there has been at any time since confederation, and that number is yearly increasing. We have established a reserve list upon which men who have withdrawn, or who had served out their time in the active militia, are placed, men in the prime of life, who would be available in case of necessity to take command of the units that were required to be enlisted. Owing to the strict enforcement of the time and age regulations of the militia, we have now commanding officers retiring and going on the reserve list. I know my hon. friend would be glad to learn, that, from this fact and from the greater interest taken in the militia, as well as from the larger attendance at the schools, we are to-day in a fair way to obtain an increased number of qualified officers.


David Tisdale: I quite agree with the hon. Minister of Militia and Defence in what he has said, and I am very glad that he gave the explanation. I shall only deal with the practical points that have been mentioned. I know that the question is a difficult one, and I am only calling attention to it because, in militia matters, these are difficult things to handle, whoever may be the minister. We all join In the desire to improve the efficiency of the militia, and, therefore, I always try to offer such criticism as I have to make with that end in view. The need of qualified officers is one of the great difficulties expressed by the militia at the present time. I know that regiments * borrow them from the schools sometimes, because they could not go into camp without them. In connection with the schools, the only criticism I wish to make is the same criticism, because one of the great points, and one which will do more than almost any other to fill up the force and induce recruits to join, is to get actual officers permanently placed at the head of individual corps. Of course, you have to get qualified officers. I wished to impress on the minister a knowledge of what I have learned from officers in regard to this matter.


Mr. KATJLBACH.: I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Militia if he has made any estimate in regard to the probable cost that will be entailed in connection with this proposed school of musketry instruction, including the salary of the instructor, the building, the transport of the soldiers to and fro, and their pay per year ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The only increase we are considering now is to one officer. The men who will assist him will be drawn from the permanent force, and, therefore, no additional vote will be required, and the transport will also be paid out of the vote for the permanent force. It is true that may interfere to some extent with the number of officers going to the permanent schools, but the additional vote we are asking, so far as I remember at the present moment, is only $2,800.


Mr. FOWLER.: Before we pass from this point, I wish to say a word or two in respect to the matter which has been brought up by the hon. gentleman who has just spoken. I think the hon. minister has missed the point, which is not in connection with the supplying to the militia corps of officers, but the difficulty of getting officers to qualify on account of the very great expense. There is too much gold lace in connection with our militia. There is too much expense, so that persons in rural communities, farmers' sons, who would make excellent officers, who are excellent fighters, who are men of good education, are not able, from the financial point of view, to take the necessary time to go for three or four months to the schools and undergo the expense of procuring the necessary uniform, which is a very expensive matter, and which is necessary if they mess with the officers. I think something should be done by the

hon. minister along these lines, so as to simplify the expense necessary to enable a man to qualify. I was, for a number of years, an officer in a cavalry regiment, and, therefore, I think I am qualified to speak with some force in respect to that. The expense of an officer fitting himself out in a hussar regiment is very great. It will cost him, if he gets anything like a decent uniform, $300 at the very least. That, for a rich man's son, is a mere bagatelle, it does not amount to anything, but, it is not always rich men's sons who make the best officers to command regiments, and, I think, in order to give men in the rural districts an opportunity to qualify, this expense should be simplified. I know in connection With my own regiment, the Stli Regiment of Cavalry, and one of the best regiments in the Dominion of Canada, the expense of an officer supplying himself with his uniform has gone up to such an extent that it is almost impossible in the rural districts from which that regiment is drawn to get officers to fill the places, and the result is, that officers are taken from the cities, which is an unfair thing to men in the country who desire to qualify themselves for officers, and it is not always the best thing for the regiment itself. I trust that the hon. minister will take some steps along these lines, and I think if he takes such steps as will cheapen the expense of the uniform, it will be a move in the right direction. I believe that officers should be well qualified. I believe that subaltern officers should understand musketry instruction as well as captains and field officers. The subaltern officers should be grounded in musketry instruction just as any other officer is. I do not believe that you will find that the plan will work well unless you go to the officers with the instructions when you cannot get them to come to these schools. It is better to go to them, because we want to have them thoroughly instructed. I believe the hon. minister is in earnest in tips matter, and is desirous that the militia of Canada shall be a properly drilled and equipped force, and I trust he will take these suggestions into consideration.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I quite sympathize with the views expressed by my hon. friend from King's. N.B., (Mr. Fowler). As an officer myself, I have been through it as he has, and I know what it means when you want an expensive uniform not to have the money to buy one. At the same time, I think it is not absolutely compulsory at the depots that officers going through school instruction, should have a mess uniform or a dress uniform. If it is compulsory, the rule should be changed, I agree it is a point well worth considering, whether something cannot be done towards cheapening the very heavy expense for the necessary uniform, in order that no one in Canada may be excluded from joining the


George William Fowler: militia. I quite understand that it is of first importance that officers should possess a knowledge of musketry, but what was in my mind was, that if the field officers, including adjutant, were competent they might be able to instruct their company officers at the camps or headquarters of the regiment.


George William Fowler: That might be done, but I think some arrangement should be made whereby a school-not a regular school as at Fredericton or Kingston-but that some temporary school should be established. That was done years ago. I know there was a cavalry instructor employed for the 8th Cavalry, and the officers met for drill some three nights a week.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: There was one in St. John some three years ago.


George William Fowler: That was simply a school in equitation, and that is not of so much importance, because in the country almost all the boys know how to ride a horse. I think the difficulty with our drill is that there is altogether too much parade movement, and not enough of practical work. We do not want all this fuss and feathers, because that is not the sort of thing that counts. In a picture of a Boer commando you cannot tell the officers from the privates, and yet these officers did their duty fairly well, I think, and showed considerable knowledge of generalship. The uniform does not make the officer, and I trust some changes will be made in that respect.


Edward Gawler Prior: I agree with the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fowler), that the high cost of the uniform should be put a stop to. It is very true that it is not compulsory for a young officer going to camp or to a school to have a full kit, or even a mess jacket, as that regulation was changed, some years ago, but we do know that when officers meet together, if some of the older officers or some of the young ones with money have gay uniforms, the other young men do not like to appear unless they can dress just as well as the others, and it is not right to ask them to, either.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Edward Gawler Prior: I am strongly in favour of the minister trying to secure some distinctive uniform for the Canadian militia.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Edward Gawler Prior: It is not necessary that we should have the same expensive uniforms as the British soldiers. We are only called out once in a while, whereas the Imperial troops are on service all the time, and they need good uniforms. Nothing is nicer than the uniform of the Strathconas

or the Australians, and if we adopted something picturesque without being expensive we would get as many young fellows willing to put on that uniform as we do at present. I jnade some remarks some time ago that I am now rather sorry for, although I meant them. I find the general commanding says in his report to the minister :
I consider that as a whole the musketry efficiency of our troops is very far below the standard required by the conditions of modern warfare.
And he submits a proposal for the appointment of a qualified officer as instructor general of musketry. He believes that would be the best way to get our militia into an efficient state of marksmanship. We know that whoever is general officer commanding is an expert, and as he is sent here to advise the government as to all these matters, it would be very wrong, indeed, for any officer like myself to set himself up against the general's opinion. If the major general commanding believes that this is the best thing for the militia, I for one would be very sorry to gainsay him. At the same time, I have my own opinion as to how it will work out. However, as the minister said, let us give it a fair trial for a year or two, and it will not cost much. I hope the experiment will turn out as well as the general thinks it will.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: I endorse the remarks made by the member for King's (Mr. Fowler) as to the position in which we should place the volunteers of this country. Our main object should be to make the conditions as favourable as possible for the cadets attending our schools. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Fowler) referred to the old system of bringing the instruction to the men, and not the men to the instruction, and that is an idea that I have always strongly advocated. It will be a great service to many of our cadets who are unable to attend the schools for want of the needful -money. Experience has shown that the question of uniform has been one of great inconvenience. I have been in schools where numbers of cadets were not dressed in the same rich garb as their neighbours, and young men who have not got the money to dress as well as others, do not care to be conspicuous. If it could be arranged that each cadet should have the same description of uniform and have it at a moderate cost, it would be a great improvement on the present system and give general satisfaction. It would be a very great advantage if the instructor were to go to the regimental centres where men could be found in numbers who were willing and anxious to attend the instructions. Most of the regiments have a drill shed, and very often the men could put in their time there in the evenings in order to obtain that instruction which they could not acquire if they were called upon to 107
attend during the day or working hours. Most of those in the rural battalions are farmers' sons, and although their martial spirit is everything that can be desired, still their means will not permit of them in many cases devoting all their time and attention to military matters which they naturally desire, but unable to afford it.


Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).: I would like to bring to the attention of the hon. Minister of Militia (Mr. Borden) the claim of Capt. Thomas Mackenzie, who is caretaker of the drill hall armouries of the 71st Regiment of Fredericton, N.B. It seems, Capt Mackenzie came here at the time of the Trent affair, in 1861, and since then for a period of forty years he has been engaged in the militia service of Canada. I believe he has a perfect record, both before and after he came to this country. He says he is now over seventy years of age, that he has been in twenty-two engagements, and has a service of nearly sixty years altogether, including the forty years during which he has filled one position or other in the militia of Canada. He says :
An equal length of time in the civil service would have brought an increased salary and a retiring allowance. To remain in the militia service of Canada I allowed the opportunity to pass of obtaining the many positions that are open to discharged non-commissioned officers of the British service, most of which carry with them, after long and faithful service, a retiring allowance. The Customs, Post Office and War Departments of the Empire are largely filled with discharged soldiers of good character and ability, and positions like quartermaster, barrack-master, &c., in the many depots and camps in Great Britain are all filled with deserving soldiers, to any of which, I might say without egotism, J was eligible ; but I considered that Canada would eventually offer as good opportunities, but so far they have never come my way; and now, when over seventy years of age, I realize the fact that at any time a younger man than myself may be appointed to the position I now hold, as caretaker of the drill hall.
Further on, he says :
Although relieved, but never for inefficiency, from positions of trust and responsibility I held where these carried higher salary and position, I never made those removals a subject of complaint, and may further state that I applied three different times to be put on the superannuation list.
A request which of course under the law could not be complied with. He has referred me to Colonels Tucker and Prior, both members of this House, and to the hon. Minister of Militia himself, with regard to his character and capability. I do not suppose this case would be affected by the Act respecting pensions, which the hon. minister is about to introduce; but I think it is a case which deserves consideration at the hands of the government and the country. Forty years' service of that kind surely should not pass without recognition. There-



fore, I have a great deal of confidence in appealing on Capt. Mackenzie's behalf to the Minister of Militia, iii case it becomes necessary to appoint some one to the place he has tilled for so many years.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I know Capt. Mackenzie very well, and I know him favourably; I know nothing of him but what is deserving. Unfortunately, however, like many others, perhaps equally good men, his position is such that under our law we are not able to do anything for him in the way of a pension at the present time, nor do I think we shall be able to do anything under the Pension Bill which 1 am about to propose, and which I hope will become law. We have, however, been in the habit of keeping many deserving old men in certain posts connected with the stores, the caretaking of public buildings, &e., who are really not able to do the work, but who are kept because of what they have done, without being expected to do a great deal of work. I may say, so far as Capt. Mackenzie is concerned, that instead of dispensing with his services, it was only the other day that we increased his pay by a quarter of a dollar a day. I may say too, what perhaps Capt. Mackenzie has not informed the hou. leader of the opposition


Robert Laird Borden: I may say that it was in February last, he wrote to me.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: He is an Imperial pensioner, and is now in receipt of a pension of 40 cents or 50 cents every day of his life, and has been during the forty years he has been in Canada; and I am told, what I am glad to believe, that he is not in pecuniary difficulties, but is very comfortably off indeed. So I do not think his case is a bad one, and when we have increased his pay, I think we have treated him pretty well.
Hon. Mr. PRIOR, I am glad to hear the very good account the minister gives of Capt. Mackenzie, for I intended to bring up his case if my hon. friend the leader of the opposition had not done so. It seems a pretty hard case. He has served -in Persia and in the Indian Mutiny, and he says he did not come here on his own account, but was ordered here by the Horse Guards in 1866, and he is receiving now less than he did then. If the minister finds that he is in any pecuniary need, I hope he will take his case into consideration.


Robert Laird Borden: I would like also to bring to the attention of the hon. Minister of Militia the case of the pay owing to Private Zong, a son of William Zong, of 29 Richmond street. Halifax, a member of the first contingent. He died, I think of enteric fever, in South Africa, and his father says that his pay from the 25th of October, Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).
1899, until the time of his death was never paid.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Does that mean the Imperial pay or the difference of pay ?


Robert Laird Borden: He does not state distinctly in his letter as to that; but I should gather from what he says that no pay whatever has been received during that time.
The	MINISTER	OF	MILITIA	AND
DEFENCE. The accountant says it is the Imperial pay.


Robert Laird Borden: The Canadian pay has been paid ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MILITIA	AND
DEFENCE. Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: It must be, then, the Imperial pay. Perhaps the hon. gentleman can take some	steps to remedy that ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MILITIA	AND
DEFENCE. I understand from the deputy minister that money is being forwarded from time to time, from the War Office to meet these claims, and that while he does not remember in regard to this particular claim, there is no doubt that in the very near future the money will be received and distributed through the Militia Department.


Robert Laird Borden: I was going further to state, with regard to this case as well as several other cases in my own constituency and in my own province, that we would be very glad indeed to know at as early a date as possible what the intentions of the government are with respect to making some provision or allowance in cases where soldiers who were killed or who died of disease in South Africa, have left persons in Canada dependent upon them. This was a matter which I brought to the attention of the government in the debate on the Address, and the right hon. gentleman who leads the government then stated that no definite announcement could be made at that time, for the reason that this government desired an exact statement of the intentions of the Imperial government, having regard to the terms of the despatch in pursuance of which the troops went to South Africa. That may afford a reason why no definite statement may be made at the present time; but I am sure there will be great satisfaction throughout the country, if an announcement of the policy of the government with respect to matters of that kind can be made at the earliest possible moment.
The hon. gentleman knows that in the cases of several men of the first contingent who were killed outright, some provision was made for their families by reason of a

certain insurance on their lives through Sir Charles Tapper. In my own constituency the families of two men who were killed at Paardeberg have received $1,000 each from the insurance. In the case of Private Zong, of ' H ' Company, that insurance was not available because he did not die of wounds but of disease. But the one case is as deserving of consideration as the other, and it is extremely desirable that the policy of the government should be placed before the country at the earliest possible moment.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I quite agree in the view just expressed. There are three sources from which assistance will be derived by the parties referred to. First, the Imperial government, which, in accordance with the original memorandum under which the contingents were sent to South Africa, agreed to give them Imperial pensions. Then there is a very large patriotic fund which has been used to relieve cases of distress, and in which there still remains an enormous sum that will be divided equitably among those entitled to share in it. Then there is this government, and I can assure the hon. gentleman that it is our intention to bring down a measure as will satisfy the requirements and meet what the most ardent admirers of the men who went to South Africa could desire. But I think it was prudent to wait until we were fully advised, and perhaps some conference may be had with the other two sources from which money will be derived to meet these obligations.


Mr. CLARKE.: Has the question presented itself to the hon. gentleman whether it would not be advisable, taking all the circumstances into consideration, to increase the pay given the men of the first contingent to an amount equal to that paid the men of the second and third contingents. I do not know whether the attention of the hon. minister has been drawn to that matter, but I know that I have been in receipt of communications asking me to draw his attention to it. There is a marked difference in the pay of the oflficers and men of the first contingent as compared with that of the second and third. While not desirous of making any comparisons, I think I am justified in saying that the men of the first contingent did exceedingly well and are entitled to the most liberal consideration, and I feel justified in bringing up this matter in view of the very satisfactory declaration which -the hon. minister has just made of the intention of the government to- deal liberally with those who served their country so well in South Africa. There is such a marked difference in the pay of the first as compared with the second and third contingents, that I hope the minister will give the matter his best consideration and ask parliament for an appropriation to make up the difference. I do not think that would take more than $100,000 or $125,000.
107*


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The hon. gentleman must remember that when the Bill was introduced a year ago, under which the money was voted, the pay for sending these contingents to South Africa, this question of pay was very carefully considered. Without expressing any personal opinion-because I recognize that where all did so well it is undesirable that any distinction should be made, and the fact is recorded in history that it would be impossible to select one particular contingent which rendered more valuable services than another according to the opportunities presented-my hon. friend must not forget that when sending the contingents, the rate of pay of infantry was fixed at a certain amount and that of cavalry and that of artillery, and that the pay of the artillery and cavalry is considerably higher than that of infantry. Of course, if the House wishes to take a new departure and alter the law of last session, it is at perfect liberty to do so. But the fact remains that after careful consideration the rates of pay were fixed, and these men entered into a distinct contract knowing exactly what pay they would receive.


Edward Gawler Prior: Might I ask whether the same arms in each battalion get the same pay-whether the infantry, whether in the first or second or third battalion, gets the same pay, and likewise the cavalry and artillery ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Yes.


Edward Gawler Prior: I should be averse to any change. In the British and every other service the artillery and engineers are paid higher than infantry and cavalry.


Mr. OLIVER.: What is the intention with regard to those members of the Canadian contingents who have enlisted for further service in South Africa ? There is a force of about 150 men, principally mounted rifles, who have re-enlisted. Is it the intention to recognize those men as a Canadian force, when pensions are being considered? Unfortunately in that small corps, the number of fatalities has been very much greater proportionately than in any other part of the forces which went out from Canada. These men might be debarred from consideration by a technicality, but certainlv those who re-enlisted for service in South Africa and who have rendered that service at such cost and risk are more entitled to our consideration than the members of the first three contingents who did not re-enlist.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I can quite understand the point of the hon. gentleman's plea. Technically our contract with these men has ceased, and this government was relieved of further obligation when they had served their full term and decided to enlist again directly

under the Imperial authorities. Now that the matter has been brought forward, I shall be glad to give it careful consideration. And, perhaps, after I have discussed the matter with any colleagues, I may be able to tell the House what we propose to do In reference to it. I would mot like to give an opinion at the present moment, though I agree with the hon. gentleman that these men deserve consideration from this country for the course they have seen fit to pursue.


Frank Oliver: Might I also draw atten-ton to the fact that there are now on the way to South Africa something like 1,200 men. Although enlisted under Imperial authority, they are none the less Canadians. They go representative of Canada. We look to them to do for Canada what the first three contingents have done. I regret that they are not going as a fourth Canadian contingent. But, though not going as such nominally, they are such as a matter of fact ; and I would ask if it is the intention in any way to recognize them as Canadians in the matter of pensions in case of anything happening to them ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The fact is-I do not know whether my hon. friend (Mr. Oliver) is aware of it-the pay that these 1,200 men are to receive from the British government, or from the colonial authorities ^n South Africa, is very large indeed. These men have seen fit to enlist for three years as a South African conskibulary of mounted police, at a rate of pay which is most genei'ous. I do not think that it will be necessary for us to consider the question that my hon. friend has put.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What pay do they receive ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I think six, seven and eight shillings a day for privates, and an allowance besides.


Frank Oliver: The facts being as stated by the minister, I quite see that there is not the same necessity for considering these members of the South African constabulary as was to consider the members of the first, second and third contingents. But, I would merely ask if it is the intention of the government to give them recognition ? I think, it would be to our own credit to give these men recognition in some substantial way, although, possibly, not at the same rate as that provided for the men of the first, second and third contingents, who possibly made heavier personal sacrifices in order to go. I merely make the suggestion.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I take this opportunity to ask for information on a point referred to in a letter I have received-whether there


Frederick William Borden: .
was insurance on the members of the-second contingent ? Sir Charles Tupper, as I understand, effected insurance on the members of the first contingent, ana some-thought upon the second contingent also, though I am told that that is not the case. I am requested to inquire whether there was insurance on the members of the second contingent. The letter is from friends of Dayton Brown Hammond, of Owen Sound, who enlisted in ' C ' Battery, Toronto, and left Halifax in February, 1900, and who was killed.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: No, the government effected noinsurance whatever upon the members of any contingent.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Am I correct in understanding that the insurance effected by Sir Charles Tupper was confined to members of the first contingent ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: So far as I know, yes.


David Tisdale: Would the hon. minister be kind enough to explain about the army service corps, which we had touched upon when these other matters came up ? We understand pretty well the facts regarding the school of musketry, but the army service corps has not been explained.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: It is proposed to establish, in Canada for the first time, a branch of the service, without which no army is complete, or able, in fact, to go into the field at all, known as the army service corps. This is a corps which shall have special charge of transport and supply. At present, it is intended only to appoint one officer, at a salary of $2,000, who shall be a member of the headquarters staff, and who shall organize throughout Canada, at the time of the camps, and in order to take part in the camps and get practical experience, a corps to be called the army service corps, to take up this important branch of the duties of the militia. This question was discussed two years ago, and a similar vote was then taken. But, for one reason or another, chiefly because of so many officers having gone away to South Africa, we did not carry it into effect then. Now we propose, after the 1st of July, to begin the organization of this important branch of the service.


Frank Oliver: If it is in order at this stage, I would ask what is proposed to be done with regard to the organization of mounted rifles in Manitoba and the Northwest ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Last year I stated in the House, in reply to questions, that we intended to

-organize a corps of mounted rifles in the North-west-to begin there, and, I hoped, later on, we might extend the organization "throughout the country at large. The proposal is as follows, though it has not been -carried into effect, although we are moving-in that direction : Military district No. 10 ; number of companies, 8. I thought I had the list of headquarters, but I see it is not here. I think there are four companies in the North-west. The organization is to be carried on at once.


Andrew B. Ingram: I have looked over the [DOT]different items under the head of militia, and I see nothing under which I could fairly discuss the question of the cadet corps of the various high schools of Canada. I would like to know from the hon. gentleman whether he intends to supply the cadet corps with the Lee-Enfield or the Lee-Metford rifles, or what encouragement he proposes to give to the various cadet corps.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: It will be impossible at present to supply them with the Lee-Enfield rifles, but as fast as we are calling in the Martini-Henry, and the old Snider, we are issuing them to the cadets. We have only about 35,000 Lee-Enfield rifles at present in Canada, not more than enough to arm the active militia. It would, therefore, be impossible at the present moment to do more than we are doing.


Andrew B. Ingram: What about the Morris "tube ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: That is simply used for the purpose of practice; it is not a rifle, it is simply an attachment.


Andrew B. Ingram: I understand that in England the government gives the Lee-Metford arm, and valuable trophies are offered for public school comxjetition ; also the corps are allowed to compete in certain matches at Bisley. I understand now that the officer commanding military district No. 1 is in favour of the department adopting something of that kind in Canada. I also find in the report, Appendix No. 1 to the report of the Department of Militia, in a report of the Chief Superintendent of Stores, some reference that he makes to the cadet corps. He says :
The question of a suitable arm for issue to the cadet corps and boys' brigades, as also the [DOT]extent to which they are to be used for firing purposes or otherwise, ig" one which requires consideration, and the formulation of rules or instructions in connection therewith.
So it is evident the department is really considering this question. Then I find some mention made of the Morris tube :
The present supply of these articles will not admit of their being brought into general use
by the force. The necessity for their use during the winter months and in localities where rifle ranges are not available, is an admitted fact. Their use necessitates the provision of mantlets, which are the main expense. It is suggested that 100 mantlets and at least 200 aiming tubes, with 1,000,000 rounds of ammunition, be ordered for the present to commence with; this supply might afterwards be increased.
So I take it that the department is considering the advisability of doing this kind of thing. I understand there are something like thirty-eight cadet corps associated with the high schools, not counting others in the public schools, and having, I believe, an average of about fifty to each company. Those who are interested in the advancement of the cadet corps say that something like fifteen or twenty a year leave the various companies to follow other callings or professions ; they think these form a very good nucleus for the active militia, and that these young men, when they join the militia force, should be granted some rights that they have not now. For instance, I may give you what they recommend in that line ;
1.	That the government issue four Lee-Metford rifles to each high school cadet corps, and forty rounds of ammunition per member, with full permission to practice on the local regimental ranges on certain days of the week, or the issue of Morris tubes with targets and forty rounds of ammunition.
2.	That the government send to each principal of a collegiate institute having a cadet corps a copy of the general orders as they appear.	*
' 3. That each man who has been gazetted as an officer in a cadet corps, on joining the militia be held duly qualified for the rank of lieutenant.
4. That the government issue free of charge tents and blankets to any high school or collegiate institute cadet corps on requisition from the principal through the regular channel for instructional camp purposes, boards of education being held responsible for said stores, &c.
I remember that the late government, a few years ago, when asked to supply the various cadet corps witL tents, refused to supply them. Although I am not a military man, it occurred to me at that time that, considering the time these boys were giving for the purpose of drill, and for competition with each other in the various towns where these corps exist, it was not a step in the right direction. These organizations are imbuing our boys with a military spirit that will be in the interest of this country, if at any time we have trouble with any other country, and it seemed to me that instead of taking away any of their privileges, they should receive even greater encouragement. Speaking of the cadet corps in my own city, I may say that they have competed with London and other cities, and so far have succeeded in carrying off the prizes. They are very much interested in the work, and they have a good instructor, but they feel at present that the government is not giving them sufficient encouragement. We find that
34u3

in the Royal Military College of Kingston only twenty-nine cadets availed themselves of the privilege, under paragraph seventy-three of the Royal Military College regulations, of being attached to the Canadian militia at camps of instruction. I also find there are eight who have received commissions from the Imperial army. Now, this speaks well of the cadet corps. Though I do not pretend to be a military critic as to military movements and the like of that, yet, as a layman, I have compared the drill of the cadet corps with that of the 25th Battalion. While I do not wish to say one word against the efficiency of the 25th Battalion, I could not help remarking that, in my judgment at least, the movements that both organizations were put through were rather in favour of the cadet corps, these seemed to be better drilled, and they took a great pride iu it.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: What the hon. gentleman has said is most interesting, and I may say that I am in thorough sympathy with his views. Unfortunately we have not the equipment, and I have no doubt that is the reason why my predecessor in a former administration found it impossible to comply with the request then made. We have to some extent been able to grant equipment in the past to some of the cadet corps ; but last year we had to give formal notice that we could not do it in future. If the whole militia of Canada are to drill annually, unless we get a very much larger vote than we are getting now, we cannot possibly supply the equipment outside the militia. But I quite recognize the importance of what the hon. gentleman has pointed out. These boys are the Canadian soldiers of the future, and they should be trained in boyhood, they should begin to-day, certainly as young as twelve years of age, and in that way we will make efficient and effective soldiers of them. I am entirely in sympathy with that idea. I am in hopes that it will be possible, by some arrangement with the provincial authorities, to have it made incumbent upon every teacher who receives authority to teach, to qualify himself as instructor at least in the rudiments of drill. I think it is something that may properly be done. I will try to make some arrangement with the different local governments by which this may be done. I was not able to catch everything my hon. friend said, but I will read, when it is published in ' Hansard,' carefully what he said. I will ask the general officer commanding and the headquarters staff to look into the matter. so that we may go as far as we possibly can with our present equipment and means to meet the views which he has given expression to.


Andrew B. Ingram: I have here the report of this cadet corps when it was in camp and Mr. INGRAM.
I will be very glad to turn it over to the hon. minister. He will find it a very creditable report indeed. As far as issuing the general orders is concerned, it strikes me there can be no objection to that.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In regard to the hon. minister's observations that he will take some steps to see that every teacher is qualified as a military instructor, I would ask him what he will do with the female teachers who are now employed in the proportion of about two to one of the men ?


Edward Gawler Prior: I would like to ask the hon. minister who the two brigade majors are and where they are to be stationed.. The hon. gentleman said that part of the pay asked for was for two new brigade majors.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I may tell my hon. friend (Hon. Mr. Prior) that we really need more than two. Toronto needs one and the other will probably go to Kingston.


Edward Gawler Prior: Have you not one at Toronto at the present time ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: No, only temporarily. Since Major General Herbert's time there have been no brigade majors. They were abolished at that time. But the work has increased so largely at our different district headquarters that it is absolutely necessary that the district officers commanding should have some assistance.


Edward Gawler Prior: Can the hon. gentleman say whom he is going to appoint as brigade major at Toronto ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: No, at the present moment I have not the slightest idea.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Mr. Chairman


Some hon. MEMBERS: Carried.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I am afraid that I will have to ask the indulgence of the committee for two or three minutes notwithstanding the remarks of disapprobation which fell from hon. gentlemen opposite.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Go on.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I intend to go on. I intend to refer to the question of the pay of the first contingent. It is so long since I left the militia force that I had forgotten that there is some difference between the pay of an infantryman, a cavalryman and an artilleryman. I do not say that the men of the second and third contingents got too much pay, but the difference between the pay of the men of the first contingent who were infantrymen and the men of the

second and third contingents was very great indeed. The pay provided for the men of the first contingent was forty cents a day.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Fifty cents.


Mr.   CLARICE.@: While the pay of the second and third contingents was half as much more.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Seventy-five cents.


Edward Gawler Prior: Why ?


Mr.   CLARICE.@: I am not prepared to say why, but I think the difference is much greater than the difference in the pay between infantrymen, cavalrymen and artillerymen in the British service.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: It is.


Mr.   CLARICE.@: I think I am justified in drawing the attention of the hon. minister to the fact and in asking him whether in view of the declaration which he made this afternoon as to the intention of the government to deal generously with these men who have done such good service for Canada and the empire, he should not take into consideration the advisability of increasing the pay all round of the men of the first contingent notwithstanding this difference that exists in the Imperial service between the pay of an infantryman, a cavalryman and an artilleryman, and make the pay of the men of the first contingent equal to the pay of the men of the second and third contingents. These men did not go as infantrymen particularly; they went out as volunteers. The men of the first contingent, if they had been competent to ride horses, would have gone as cavalrymen or artillerymen. They did not go for the pittance granted them by the government, but they went to give proof of their loyalty to Canada and to the empire. It seems to me, as it is a matter which would only involve an expenditure of $125,000 at the most, that it would be a gracious act on the part of the hon. minister to recommend and of his colleagues to bring down a proposition to pay these men of the first contingent an equal sum to that paid to the men of the second and tliii-d contingents.


Edward Gawler Prior: Why was there this difference in the pay ? It was not only the difference between the different arms of the service.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: No, that is quite true. The reason was this :	In the second contingent
a very large number, one of the regiments at any rate, a full regiment of cavalry, or of mounted rifles, was taken from the North-west mounted police whose pay was
seventy-five cents a day and it was felt that we could not diminish or reduce that pay. I was not quite correct in saying that it was cavalry and artillery pay, although I think that was the pay adopted for the officers, but, for the men it was North-west mounted police pay.


Edward Frederick Clarke: But there were scores of men who were not in the North-west mounted police who volunteered to go as mounted infantrymen.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Certainly.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I am not complaining that the men of the second and third contingents were paid seventy-five cents a day, but I am urging upon the hon. minister, that, in view of all the circumstances, it would be a graceful and proper act if the ministry could see its way to paying the men of the first contingent an amount equal to the pay of the men of the second and third contingents.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I will consider the matter.
Annual drilf, $275,000.


Edward Gawler Prior: I notice in the report of the general officer commanding, some remarks that come under the head of this annual drill. I see he again draws attention, as other general officers commanding have done in the past, to the inadequate time that is allowed for the annual training. I am rather disappointed to see that the hon. minister has not asked for a larger sum for the annual drill than last year, although I am quite aware that he had the whole militia training last year and he may have had some difficulty with his colleagues.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: If you were in my place you would know.


Edward Gawler Prior: I know that. I see by the report of the general officer commanding that he has drawn attention to the short time allowed for the annual drill. He says :
Notwithstanding the most strenuous efforts on the part of officers, non-commissioned officers and men, these troops can never be made even fairly fit to take the field with the limited period of annual training that they receive under existing arrangements.
I am not going to say very much about that. This matter has been brought up time and time again. It does seem a pity, now that so much interest is taken in the militia which has acquitted itself so well, and now that it has been tried, that the government does not see fit to bring in a larger sum to bring the militia into a proper state of fitness to take the field. I see also,

that lie calls attention to the drill of city corps. He says :
So long as their training is confined to the limited area of a drill hall, with an occasional evening route march and a few church parades, it is obviously impossible for them to learn those most important duties of a soldier.
The most important duties of a soldier, in his opinion and in mine, are outpost duties, scouting, attack and defence of positions and the execution of hasty entrenchments. He does not say anything in regard to rifle shooting. I suppose that goes without saying. There is no doubt that city corps do not get sufficient drill in outpost duty, scouting and the movements that are in use in the field in warfare. The same report goes on to call attention to the musketry, but I referred to that before. The general does not say anything about the efficiency of ciry corps as to rifle shooting, but take the whole militia of Canada as a body it is certainly inefficient in rifle shooting. That is the reason why we are asking for more ammunition and more ranges. I am well aware that the minister is doing ail he can, but the government and the members of the House will have to be educated up to see the desirability and the necessity of giving greater assistance to the militia in the future than they have in the past.


David Tisdale: Has the minister made inquiries from the different rural regiments particularly as to the possibility of the men being able to attend for sixteen days in camp ? If there is no difficulty in getting the men I certainly would urge very strongly the adoption of the opinion of the general in that respect. Sixteen days is quite a long time to get men away from their employment. After this year we will not have the South African war and other large expenditures to provide for, and I would suggest to the minister that when we have these large expenditures out of the way he should ask for the necessary money to carry out the suggestions of the general and place our militia in other respects on a satisfactory basis. As to the city battalions I believe it would be of great benefit to them if they would occasionally be sent into camp. The hon. member for Haldimand <Mr. Thompson) criticised the militia expenditures in the cities. I am personally in favour of a good round expenditure in the cities for the reason that city corps can be kept up efficiently in large numbers, and while my sympathies are in many ways more with the rural battalions, yet it is a good object lesson to have the city regiments turn out in fine military shape. There is more wealth in the cities than in the rural districts, and I understand that the officers and men themselves join in and do their share for the maintenance of the regiments in addition to the aid they receive from the government. While a handsome Mr. PRIOR.
uniform is not necessary to make a soldier yet nothing gives more encouragement than to see these regiments turn out well dressed on parade as it appeals to the eye and to the senses, and I am in favour of that if it can be done without any unreasonable expenditure.	.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I saw it stated in one of the city papars that No. 2 district will not be called out for drill until the fall, owing to the coming visit of the Duke of York. Has the minister reached a conclusion on that matter ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The question has been raised as to whether the militia would prefer to postpone their annual camp until such time as His Royal Highness visits Canada, but no conclusion has been come to, and none will be come to without the general approval of the militia. As a military man, I have no doubt that we would get a great deal more good out of the money we spend if the camps were continued at least for four days longer. The expenditure for transportation has to be incurred anyway, and it would only necessitate the extra four days' pay and subsistence. For one reason or another we have adopted the rule of twelve-day camps, and probably one of the reasons wliy that term was adopted was that it was about as long as the men cared to be away from their homes and work. However, it is not impossible that the time might be extended. I would add that I do not believe that the money which is expended on the twelve days' drill is by any means wasted. I do not believe that the money spent on one man who goes to one camp and who does not go again is wasted. That man has learned valuable lessons which he will never forget. My hon. friend (Hon. Mr. Prior) has spoken of the amount of training necessary to enable the militia to take the field, and I would point him to the very work done by our contingents in South Africa. A large proportion of our men were not militia men. Many of them were men who never had the advantage of even one camp, and yet we saw how rapidly they became good soldiers. Even if we do not extend the time beyond the twelve days the money we expend on camps is doing very good work. I agree with the remarks made by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Tisdale) as to the city coxps. In case we were suddenly called upon to raise an army or part of an army in Canada we would of necessity have to rely for our first line of defence upon <the city battalions. These magnificent battalions are perfectly ready to take the field and the additional drill they require would be very quickly learned.


Robert Laird Borden: I wish to bring to the attention of the minister the case of Pte. Sievert, of the first contingent, who

was nilled a t Paardeberg. I have in my hands statements made by two men who were in the line with Pte. Sievert at that battle, and I will read these statements to the hon. minister, so that he may consider whether or not any recognition of the very gallant act which led to the death of Pte. Sievert should be obtained. I do this because Pte. Sie-vert's father, who is one of my constituents, has discussed the matter with some of the officers in the Imperial service at Halifax, and they have stated to him, that it was a proper subject to mention to the War Office, or the Imperial authorities. I do not undertake to offer an opinion on the subject myself ; but, I give these statements of two men who were with Pte. Sievert at the time of his death. The following is the state-men of No. 7771, Pte. Laring H. Gates, ' F ' Company, Royal Canadian Regiment, dated September 2, 1900 :
I saw Private Sievert attempt to carry No. 7775, Private G. Orman, ' F ' Company, Royal Canadian Regiment, off the battlefield at Paardeberg on the morning of the 27th day of February, 1900, in the face of a brisk rifle fire.
We left our trenches at 2 o'clock a.m. to advance our trenches on to Cronje's position. Orman, Sievert and myself were in -the rear rank, which was fifteen paces in rear of the front rank.
We all had our rifles slung and carried entrenching tools. Private Orman was on my right and Sievert on my left. When the Boers opened fire we lay down. When the order came for us to retire we three got up together and started to retire. Orman was then about five yards on my left and Sievert was at about the same interval on my right. We had only gone a few yards when Orman cried out, ' I am shot and done for.' As soon as Sievert heard him cry, he started to go to him, and when he passed me I said to him, ' Where are you going?' He said, ' I'm going for Orman.' I told him, * You had better no-t, you'll only get shot yourself.' He said, ' I'm going to try at any rate.' He left me, and when he got almost to Orman he (Sievert) cried out, * I'm hit,' and he clasped his hand on his stomach and then fell down.
Silverton, S.A.R., Sept. 2, 1900.
(Sgd.) LARING H. GATES,
Pte., * F ' Company, R.C.R.
Witness :
H. B. Stairs, Capt., R.C.R.
That statement is corroborated by a statement of Pte. Wesley Irwin, a private in the same company, dated Halifax, December 17, 1900, as follows :
I saw Private Sievert attempt to carry No. 7775, Private G. Orman, * F ' Company, R.C.R., off the battlefield at Paardeberg on -the morning of the 27th February, 1900, in the face of heavy rifle fire.
We left our trenches at 2 a.m to advance on Cronje's position. Sievert, Orman, Gates and I were in the rear rank, which was fifteen paces in the rear of the front rank. We all had our rifles slung, and carried entrenching tools. When the Boers opened fire we all lay down, and when the order came for us to retire, we all got up together and started to retire. Almost immediately Orman was shot. Sievert at this
time was only six feet from me, and he at once started to bring Orman in, and was shot while trying to do so.
I brought this matter very briefly to the attention of the hon. minister last year by a letter, and he was good enough to send me in reply Col. Otter's report on it. Col. Otter seems to have thought that no action was advisable, because this very gallant act was not observed by the lieutenant in command at the time. Whether or not that is a good reason I do not know ; but I would like to bring to the attention of the hon. gentleman the fact that a similar gallant act. which resulted successfully, was mentioned by General Smith-Dorrien as good ground for recommending the Victoria Cross. I refer to his report on Pte. Kinsley, which is as follows :
No. 185, Private W. A. Kinsley, of the Royal Canadian Dragoons, in a most gallant way, carried out of action under a heavy and close fire, No. 172, Corporal Percy R. Price, of the Royal Canadian Dragoons, getting wounded himself in doing so.
It is true, in that case, that Pte. Kinsley was not killed, and his attempt was successful. In the present case, Pte. Sievert went to the assistance of Pte. Orman, who was a comrade of his-Orman came from Dartmouth, and Sievert from Halifax-and he was mortally wounded in doing so. Whether or not his act is capable of being officially recognized, I do not know ; but I do know that it was a very gallant act on the part of Sievert, one which makes us all feel proud of him as one of the Canadians who fought in South Africa ; and I do sincerely trust that it will be brought to the attention of the proper authorities, and that some recognition of it will be given.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I had hoped, when my hon. friend brought this matter to my attention, that Col. Otter would be able to throw some light upon it, and, therefore, I referred it to him. Unfortunately, as has been said, he does not seem to know much about it; but I have observed-and this would seem to support the view of the hon. leader of the opposition-that the commanding officer of Sie-vert's company, Capt. Stairs, distinctly states, in a letter which he addressed to Col. Otter, that Pte. Irwin would know the facts, and he adds :
I know of no one else who would know about it except Private Irwin.
From the statement which the hon. gentleman has read to the House, it seems that Pte. Irwin has a distinct knowledge of what took place.; and in view of that. I think it would be quite proper to submit this case, and I 'shall be very happy to do so. through the proper authorities, for the consideration of the War Office.


Robert Laird Borden: I may say that the statement of Pte. Irwin was, I under-

stand, obtained through Capt. Stairs. I have the original statement in my possession, and I shall have very great pleasure in forwarding it to the hon. gentleman for the purpose mentioned.
At six o'clock, committee took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at 8 o'clock.



THE E. B. EDDY COMPANY.

[Stage Direction]
House In committee on Bill (No. 70) respecting the E. B. Eddy Company.-Mr. Champagne.
Thomas Simpson Sproule: I notice that in this Bill and the preceding one and several others introduced this session, there is a very bail principle. It seems to me that the aim of these companies is to obtain the power to get control of other companies in the same line and thus create a monopoly. If such a demand were made in the case of a railway Bill, the company would have to name the other companies with which it desires to amalgamate, and then it would be for parliament to decide whether it was proper to grant it this power. But in this case and the preceding one and others, powers are asked to amalgamate with any company in the same line, the object being to create a monopoly, which is against public interest.


Hon. Mr. SUTHERLAND.: Theoretically there may be something in what any lion, friend said, but we have to remember that the conditions with regard to trade and manufacture have changed very much in other countries. In England the power asked here is granted to a very large extent, in order to enable companies, by combining their capital and forces, to reduce the cost of manufacture and thus retain command in all the markets of the world. If in Canada we desire to hold our own in competition with other countries, we will have to grant the same power. Possibly for a short time, under some circumstances, this may have the effect the hon. gentleman fears, but there is greater likelihood of the public interest being protected by enabling strong companies to be formed out of combinations with other companies which, by means of the large capital at their command, will be able to reduce the cost of production and increase our trade. Take this particular industry, the manufacture of pulp into paper. Although it is claimed, and there possibly may be, a combine in the American republic and Canada, the price of paper has been reduced very considerably by the very fact that the uniting of Several companies into one with very large capital has enabled this article to be produced at a much lower cost than it was some years ago. There seems to be a misapprehension very often with regard to the granting of these Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).
privileges, which are asked for by legitimate commercial corporations. In this particular business, there is very little danger of the public interest being injured. While it requires large capital to establish a factory and purchase the limits necessary, on the other hand the area of limits is so large aDd our natural resoiurces so great that I do not think wrn need fear anything like a combine in this connection. By giving the opportunities to companies to acquire large capital and buy imprpved machinery we will encourage the investment of capital in this industry, which will increase its extent and give better employment to the people. .


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. gentleman says that theoretically my pretention may be correct, but practically it is not. The reverse is the case. This company is intended to have the power of generating light. This city is illuminated by electricity, and supposing there was another company which got its power from the Chaudiere Falls or anywhere in the vicinity to light this city, the company we are now incorporating would have the power to buy it up. And what would this company do ? The very first thing they would do would be to purchase the new company or amalgamate with it, and so do away with competition. In a great majority of instances, where these powers are applied for. we find it is not for the purpose of cheapening the product to the public, but for the purpose of making a monopoly. Railway companies have the same object in view when they amalgamate. We found by experience that when we gave charters to railway companies, the new roads were taken over by existing companies, and the public did not get the competition they expected. For years, therefore, we have sedulously avoided giving the power to amalgamate with any company unless that company is specifically named. If it is thought wise to give that power it is given, but not otherwise. I notice that we are departing from that salutary principle in private Bills. We had a Bill before the Banking and Commerce Committee this morning in which the same principle was introduced. Believing it to be wrong, I opposed that feature of it. as I oppose it in this case. Take the case of the electric railways, for instance. Look at the fight that was made year after year for the Hull road to get into Ottawa, and the fight made by the Ottawa company to prevent it. The Ottawa company have succeeded in getting control of the city for twenty-one years, and they are using it for their own purposes. They have never allowed the other company to get within the city limits. Their object was to prevent competition- and there is no competition at the present time. If this company required such a power as this for the legitimate purposes of their business, there would not be much hardship in waiting a few months-and it

need be only a few months-to give notice to the public in the usual way and apply to this House for the necessary power naming the company with which they wished to amalgamate. This course would have the advantage, that it would give the public three months notice to ascertain whether the power was to be used for a legitimate purpose or not, and, if not, to prepare to fight it.


Mr. WADE.: It does not seem to mo that withholding this power from the company would affect the result. We know that at the present time companies are amalgamating without a line of legislation.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: They cannot amalgamate without authority.


Fletcher Bath Wade: They can practically-one becomes a lessee of the other.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That is not amalgamation.


Fletcher Bath Wade: It is to all intents and purposes-it accomplishes the object the hon. gentleman seeks to provide against.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then, what is the use putting in this clause ?


Fletcher Bath Wade: If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Sproule) will permit me-the advantage of this is that it allows the company to do in a legitimate way what they can accomplish in another way. If they wish to take stock in another company, they can do it. We are only authorizing this company to amalgamate with the other company, but nothing can be done until the other company is specifically authorized to amalgamate with this company. I think it is better to give a clear charter to the company to do what they want to do, and do it in a legitimate way. And. as has been said by my hon. friend (Hon. Mr. Sutherland), I do not see any reason why these companies should not amalgamate and make large concerns. Times have changed and the methods of manufacture have greatly changed. These companies must compete against much larger concerns than was the case fifteen or twenty years ago. We must consider these facts, and give companies powers that will enable them to compete effectually.


Mr. LANCASTER.: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Wade) has shown tlie best reasons why this power should not be given. He says we should give power to do in a legitimate way what they would do anyhow. I suppose he means by that to give them power to do it in a legal and.proper way-in a way consistent with the law.


Fletcher Bath Wade: Perhaps it would be better to say, in an open way.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: In an open way, then, to accept my hon. friend's correction of his
statement. Why should we give them power to do an objectionable thing in an open way, because otherwise they would do it in a hidden way ?


Fletcher Bath Wade: If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Lancaster) will observe that I did not say that it was objectionable-not by any means.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I was saying that the answer made was no answer to the statement made by my hon. friend from East Grey (Mr. Sproule), that this was objectionable. If they have not this power unless we give it to them, the hon. gentleman's (Mr. Wade's) argument is no answer to the statement that the power should not be given. We ought to be very careful in giving such powers to the companies. The-reasons are very clear: they have been stated by my hon. friend from East Grey, so I shall not repeat his arguments. I think we should go into the matter more deeply than merely by saying there is no harm in giving this power, because the company can do as it wishes anyway. If that is so, we should not give them powers at all-leave them to the powers they have. But I think it is idle to say that this clause is wanted in the Bill, unless it is wanted on the theory that they have not the power unless we put it in. For the reasons given by my hon. friend from East Grey I think the power should not be given.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Wade) speaks of the railway companies having power to amalgamate, which is not the fact.


Fletcher Bath Wade: I said they could amalgamate without a line of legislation, and they are doing it every day.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. gentleman must know as a lawyer that they cannot amalgamate. Leasing is one thing, amalgamation is another. If one leases the other they must come to parliament to have the lease ratified.


Fletcher Bath Wade: How about the New York Central ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The New York Central is not a Canadian railway. I would ask the hon. gentleman (Mr. Wade) if he thinks there is no virtue in competition ? If not, why do we go on chartering and giving large bonuses to new companies to build lines to compete with those already in existence ? We have been doing that ever since confederation, and we are doing it now. If you allow them to amalgamate you defeat the object you aim at. I would ask the hon. gentleman also whether he thinks there is any injury caused by the monopolies we have in the country. Are not these companies taking exorbitant profits from the people for products that might be sold at much lower prices ? Are we not making

laws to control these monopolies and combines ? We have not yet been able to make an effective law, but we have not yet ceased trying. That being so. I do not see the advantage in giving this power. As soon as we get in sight of competition we find power granted indiscriminately to prevent competition. Now, if they wish to amalgamate, as I said, let them give notice to the public, and then come before parliament. If it is done otherwise, it is done in a way that is not generally known, and, when the public are looking for substantial benefits through competition, the companies amalgamate, and the public only wake up to a realization of what has happened when they find themselves faced by monopoly prices. We have what we are suffering from year after year, combines, and trusts, and amalgamations that are bleeding the people of this country to an extent that, I think, we ought to avoid as far as possible.


Fletcher Bath Wade: Where are these trusts ? I must admit, though I am a new member and come from a remote part of the Dominion, that I have not seen these great troubles that are complained against, resulting from any companies we have incorporated in Canada. On the contrary, I think the competition we have to fear is competition from the other side of the line where they are building up great systems, and we ought to be able to meet them. If we do not do that, we will be left, in my judgment. But 1 do believe that while the greatest latitude is given to these foreign companies, or rather while they are in a position to exercise the greatest latitude in the matter of combining, if we are going to put restrictions upon our own companies that we are organizing here, if we are going to put restrictions upon our capital, then I say we are putting our capital in an unfair position with regard to the competition on the other side of the line. We are likely to be the parties that would suffer from it. We are told to-day that we are going wrong, an attenmt is being made to frighten us by 4 combine ' and ' trust.' We have combines and trusts in existence, they originated upon the other side of the line, and we have got to meet that condition of affairs, and that is the reason why I take the stand that I do.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. gentleman says that he doesn't know anything about troubles arising from combines. Does he know anything about the Standard Oil Company ?


Fletcher Bath Wade: I do.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Does he know that from the very day they got control of the oil refineries of Canada, oil has gone up ? Is he aware of that ? because every one else in the country knows it. Is he aware that we have a Bill before this House to-day to Mr. SPROULE.
legalize a deal between the province of Manitoba and the Northern Pacific Railway ? Why ? In order to get competition with the Canadian Pacific Railway. Is he aware that Manitoba is giving large bonuses to build that Rainy River Railway, and that we have given bonuses in this House, and the Ontario legislature also, in order to have competition ? Would it be an act of wisdom for us, after all this lias been done, to allow that company to unite with the Canadian Pacific Railway ? Why, we put clauses in Bills aiming to prevent companies uniting with the Canadian Pacific Railway, and then we are asked to destroy that competition that we desire to secure. That is the reason why we should avoid giving these companies the right to amalgamate. The hon. gentleman asks if we are going to prevent these people from putting themselves in a position to compete with others. I say no, not in a legitimate way. But when they desire to do so, all they have to do is to come to parliament and get the legislation that they require for that purpose, not for the purpose of effecting a combine and raising prices, but to meet unfair competition, and parliament is always willing and has never refused to allow them power to do that. Now, the hon. gentleman says that he does not know of any harm being done from combines anil trusts. Does he know anything about the agricultural implement amalgamations in our country ? Take the Massey-Harris Company, if yon like. In 1881, when they were burned out in the village of Newcastle, they applied to that small village for a bonus of 810.000 to start up their works. Without that aid they could not start their works, because they were too weak financially. The village was not large enough, and refused to give the aid. Mr. Massey then went west, and he managed by some means to effect amalgamation with another company with good capital and started in the west. A short time after that, another company that appeared in competition was destroyed, up went the jirice of implements, and it has been up from that day to this; and practically to-day the implement manufacturers of the country are nearly all under one understanding with regal'd to prices, and the farmers have to pay, and cannot help themselves. I say that the farmers of Canada are being bled white to-day in consequence of these companies having combined. 'Take the Massey-Harris firm to-day. They commenced business for the second time in 1882, and they have made so much money since that that firm has given away over $5,000,000. we are told, for philanthropic purposes. Where does it coime from ? It comes out of two lines, it comes out of the labour that does the work and for which they pay lower wages than they ought to pay. and it comes out of the farmers to whom the implements are sold at a higher figure than is just. It is to

avoid this painful result that we should strive in this House. As long as any company comes before this House for legislation to enable it to facilitate its business, and proves that it will not resort to an amalgamation which will result in increasing the price to the consumer, or that it will result in reducing values, there would not be the slightest objection to granting such legislation.


Fletcher Bath Wade: The hon. gentleman asked if X knew the Standard Oil Company. I have had occasion to know something of it in different ways. In one way I know of it from a pamphlet that was issued by the hon. gentleman and his friends just before the last election. X believe it was intended for Ontario consumption, but it got down into the province of Nova Scotia. In that pamphlet we were told that the price of kerosene oil was increased, because the present government permitted the Standard Oil Company to import their oil in tank vessels. That was one of the arguments that was used. I am not prepared to accede to the position taken by the hon. gentleman that the Standard Oil Company has increased the price of kerosene oil here.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Every one knows it.


Fletcher Bath Wade: Well, I do not know it. I am willing to be convinced, but I have never heard any argument to satisfy me, though I have heard a great many arguments upon this subject. Now, with regard to the Massey-Harris Company. I know that before they were in existence the price of agricultural implements in Nova Scotia was much greater than it is at the present time. I know that since these concerns have been placed in a position w'here they can compete with those of the other side of the line, because they have sufficient capital for that purpose, the price of agricultural implements has been reduced. That is my experience so far as the province of Nova Scotia is concerned. I am astonished the hon. gentleman cannot see that if there is a concern upon one side of the line employing two or three million dollars, and if it comes into competition with a firm or company here that is only permitted to employ some $200,000, the disaster must be to the smaller company ; and it is for that reason that I have contended that our companies shall be given the same powers that are given to the companies upon the other side, that they should have the same jiowers of employing large capital as they have upon the other side of the line. But when it comes to appear that these trusts or combinations, as we call them, are not in the interests of the public, then it is time to have legislation for the purpose of controlling them, but surely that legislation should not prevent these companies from legitimately competing with those upon the other side of the line.


The MINISTER OP FINANCE.: We are somewhat embarrassed by the fact that this very privilege, almost in the same words, has already been given to another company of a like character, and it would certainly seem a little awkward to give it to one and to refuse it to the other. Nevertheless we must deal with the principle involved in the legislation. I do not share the alarm which some people feel as to the creation of large corporations. I think large corporations are necessary for doing business under modern conditions, both here and across the line; nor do I object to this company being a large company. But what I do say is that if any company wants to amalgamate with another company it is the business of parliament to say whether it shall be allowed to do so, in' the light of the particular circumstances which may then be disclosed. I do not approve of this practice of giving powers to companies to amalgamate with any other company with which they may wish to amalgamate. The proposed amalgamation may be wise, may be in the public interest, may be designed to bring about these economies in management which are in the public interest; but I think parliament should reserve the right to judge of that case in every instance that it should be asked to give power to amalgamate with a particular company, and not to give a general power, which I regret to see parliament seems inclined to give.
Bill reported, read the third time, and passed.



CROW'S NEST SOUTHERN RAIL WAV.

[Stage Direction]
House in committee on Bill (No. 57) to incorporate the Crow's Nest Southern Railway Company.-Mr. Galliher.
On section 12,
Thomas Simpson Sproule: I thought this was the Bill that the government had an amendment on to prevent discrimination in the sale of coal and coke to the Americans as against the people of British Columbia.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: Yes, this is the Bill, but the hon. gentleman (Mr. iSproule) is mistaken in assuming that the Bill was to be amended. The matter, as presented to the committee, was not that the Bill should be amended but that before the Bill should be finally passed, an agreement which was laid before the committee should be signed by the several companies. It was not contemplated that it should form part of the Act. Such was the understanding before the committee, whether the hon. gentleman understood it so or not.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I was not before the committee.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: There were some objections to putting a clause

into tliis Bill for tlie reason that the bodies which control the coal mines and the proposed railway, although they are the same set of men, are two corporations and it was held to he difficult to legislate as respects the railway company when the company to which we wished to apply the prohibition was the coal company, and because, even though they might be the same set of men, they were two distinct corporations. It was therefore proposed that the difficulty should be overcome by an agreement to he signed by the government on the one part, by the coal company on another part, and by the railway company on the third part, such agreement to be to the effect that in the event of any attempt to discriminate against the consumers of coal or coke in Canada, either on the part of the railway company by its rates, or on the part of the coal company by its prices, or by the two companies, then the Governor in Council might by order place restrictions upon the power of the railway company to carry coal and that after the passing of such an order, if coal or coke should be sold or carried by these companies in violation of the spirit of the agreement, they should become liable to a penalty of $3 per ton for every ton of coal or coke so carried. That is, in brief, the substance of the agreement which was finally come to. The government can execute the agreement at once through its ministers, the coal com-* pany can execute the agreement through its proper officers, but the railway company could not execute the agreement as they have no corporate existence until the passing of this Bill. It was thoroughly understood between a committee of the government and the promoters of this Bill that before the Bill was finally passed that agreement would he executed by the coal company and by the gentlemen who are the promoters of this railway company. There was a full understanding that unless that agreement is signed as agreed, this Bill will not pass to its third reading in this House.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I want to say in connection with this Bill, that I did not attend the committee at the last consideration of it. I was there the first time. But, the information was given that such an agreement would he desirable. It seems to me, from the information we get through the press regarding the agreement, that it may be worthless and for this reason : while the coal company and the railway company, which are practically the same parties, may enter into that agreement with the government, the government have power to punish them in the event of violating the agreement; by selling the coal south of the line cheaper than in British Columbia. I do not see any provision in it that they must give a full supply to British Columbia before they export. Whether that is in it or not I do not know. But, the feature of the Mr. FIELDING.
agreement that attracted my attention is the disability which rests on the Canadian Pacific Railway to develop their coal lands. They entered into an agreement with the coal company not to develop their coal lands for a certain number of years until the coal company got theirs well under way. Until that disability was lifted this bargain would remain in force, hut just as soon as that was removed then the bargain became null and void. It seems to me that this agreement would be practically worthless, because you give them the power to commence negotiations with the company and they will do as will likely be done by tbe Eddy Company to wbicb we gave power tonight. As soon as another party starts operation they will immediately get control of it, and the agreement is null and void. The agreement to have any value should give the control to the government for all time.


Mr. GALLIHER.: I might set the hon. member (Mr. Sproule) right in that respect. That was the agreement as it originally stood. I, with some others, mentioned the fact that if competition arrived at such a stage as not to require these restrictions, then, if these restrictions were taken off, they might buy up the other companies and get a monopoly. The agreement was amended to state that it might be suspended ; not declared null and void, but may be suspended when competition reaches such a stage that it is not necessary any longer to enforce these restrictions.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think they should he kept all the time.


William Alfred Galliher: It is not rendered null and void ; it is simply suspended.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Do I understand that the same agreement may be called into existence at any time ?


William Alfred Galliher: Yes, the enforcement of it may be 'suspended.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In any event, they will not enforce it unless there is need to. -I understood that the agreement became null and void. That was in the papers.


William Alfred Galliher: The papers were not right.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: It is amended as stated by the hon. member (Mr. Galliher).
Bill reported.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: When shall the Bill be read the third time ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I would ask that the third reading be fixed for another day, when we shall have a clear understanding that the agreement is signed.



CONSIDERED IN COMMITTEE-THIRD READINGS.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 61) respecting the W. C. Edwards & Company (Limited).-Mr. Rosamond.
Bill (No. 79) respecting the Lindsay, Bob-caygeon and Pontypool Railway Company. -Mr. Vrooman.
Bill (No. 75) respecting the Canadian Northern Railway Company.-Mr. McCreary.
Bill (No. 83) to incorporate the Kootenay Central Railway Company.-Mr. Galliher.
Bill (No. 84) respecting the Alberta Railway and Coal Company.-Mr. Oliver.
Bill (No. 85) to incorporate the Alberta Central Railway Company.-Mr. Oliver.

Robert Franklin Sutherland: With the unanimous consent of the House, the two Bills on the Order paper which have not been distributed, might be allowed to pass their second reading, and be referred to the committee. I suppose every member knows the object of these Bills. They were introduced with the unanimous consent of the House, and they will have to be posted seven days before they reach the Committee on Banking and Commerce.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: These are two Bills-one respecting the Western Assurance Company and the other respecting the British American Assurance Company- for the purpose of giving those companies power to invest a portion of their funds in wrecking apparatus, to correspond with similar power given to another company.


Robert Laird Borden: I think as this legislation was rendered necessary by what has taken place this session, we should expedite it. At the same time, it seems to me that the proper way to deal with a matter of this kind is to pass a general clause applicable to all companies, and not have one company after another coming to obtain special legislation.
Bill (No. 124) respecting the Western Assurance Company (Mr. McCarthy) read the second time.
Bill (No. 125) respecting the British American Assurance Company (Mr. McCarthy) read the second time.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
House again in Committee of Supply.
Militia-Annual drill, $275,000.
['That is all. But I do not think the amendment covers the ground that I desired to have covered by the section prepared by the law clerk.']
Edward Gawler Prior: I see that the general officer commanding in his report advises an increase of pay, as mentioned by the hon. member for Hahlimand (Mr. Thompson) this afternoon. On page 35, he draws attention to the fact that at the present time there are a large number of recruits every
i year, that many men do not come out for I drill year after year, even although they do not get their discharge, and that the desertions amount to about 25 per cent of the whole militia. That is a very serious state of affairs. I know that a great many men do not look on the matter with the gravity that they should. They think when they sign that it is only a matter of form, and that they can turn up at drill or not just as they please. I do not go so far as to say that they should all be summoned ; but I have seen a few hauled up before the police magistrate and fined, and it has had a most beneficial effect. I think there ought to be some means thought out by the Militia Department whereby men would be shown that when they sign for three years they are expected to turn up and do their proper duty. It is a most unfortunate state of affairs that they should look on the oath which they take and the document they sign as so much waste paper. It is to be regretted that, after all the expense in training these men, so many of them, after they are partly trained, should go away, and the country get no further benefit from their services.
The general officer suggests that the pay of the private militiaman should be increased according to service-50 cents the first year, 60 cents the second year, and 75 cents the third, thereby giving some incentive to the men to put in their full three years drill. And afterwards he suggests that the men should be encouraged to continue in the service. He says :
And I would further strongly recommend that on the expiration of their three years engagement, men of good conduct and especially noncommissioned officers, be encouraged to continue in their service on annual attestations not exceeding six years in all, receiving a gratuity on the conclusion of each extended year's training.
That suggestion is well worthy of consideration. If that could be worked out to a successful issue, it would be the means of greatly strengthening the militia and keeping good men in the ranks.
On page 39 in the report of the adjutant general, there is a paragraph regarding canteens. This is a question which was brought up last year and the year before, and caused a good deal of discussion in the press and the country generally. I think that this paragraph in the report should be seriously considered :
(6). We have heard a great deal during the past few years about the sale of liquor in camps. While I do not think that strong alcoholic drinks should be permitted, I am unable, after an experience of many years with the Canadian military forces, to advocate, or understand how well-intentioned people can advocate prohibiting the sale of lager beer and soft drinks. That men who have performed hard training in the heat of the day should be obliged to quench their thirst with lukewarm water conveyed to the grounds through half-exposed pipes, or in open-headed hogsheads, and thus exposed to impurities, seems to me to be most unreasonable. If men

34 24
are able to obtain soft drinks and lager beer instead of being compelled to drink impure or nauseating water, it would have the effect of restraining them

Here is the pith of the whole thing :
-from seeking stronger drinks outside the camping grounds, and from bringing liquor into camp in bottles, and thus temperance might better be promoted.
I am heartily in accord with that opinion, and X think that every officer, who has had much to do with camps, must see its force. Men who are in the hahit of taking any kind of drink all the year round are not going to do without it, if they possibly can get it, when they are in camp, doing hard work under a hot sun-and putting in training under energetic officers is hard work. If they cannot get it in the canteen, they will get it outside, and the liquor they will get outside, especially where it is sold close to the camps, is not likely to be the best kind, and the men are likely to take more than if they could get it in a legitimate manner in the canteen. I do not say that spirits should be sold, but nobody could possibly object to lager beer and soft drinks. This subject is well worthy the attention of the minister, and although he has time and again declared that he was not going to allow any liquor to be sold, I think that, in view of the strong representations made to him by men who are competent to judge, he should reconsider his decision.


David Tisdale: I feel it my duty to endorse what my hon. friend has just said. I know that a large section of the community entertain very strong opinions on what they call temperance. I believe in temperance, but temperance does not mean that a man shall not drink beer. I am emphatically in favour of prohibiting the use of spirits in the canteen, but I must endorse the suggestion contained in the adjutant general's report with regard to the sale of lager beer and soft drinks.
I believe also that the suggestion of increased pay for each additional year's service is a good one. The pay is small enough anyway, and it would be well to try the experiment of increasing it each year.
Coming back to the subject of the' canteen, I must say that after an experience of fifteen years in camp, and commanding a regiment, I have come to the opinion that there is nothing more conducive to keep the men in camp than a canteen where lager beer, soft drinks, cigars, &c., will be sold. This will please them just as well as going into town, where not only they will meet their fellow soldiers from other regiments, but also well-meaning, but injudicious people, who often induce them to drink more spirits than they should, and often more beer than they should. True, temperance does not consist in trying to prevent people from getting liquor of any kind, but in furnishing them with the most harmless Mr. PRIOR.
drink possible, and in seeing that they drink only in moderation.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I have generally been opposed to this policy of playing at war and military life. I think that it has a tendency to draw from industrial pursuits many young men who would be otherwise more profitably employed. But like many others, my mifid has become somewhat changed on this question of military policy. I have been many years against the expenditures on military matters and against lengthening the time of drill, but I do think that the suggestion of the major general with regard to increasing the pay each succeeding year, is a wise one. I have watched the course of military events for many years in the locality where I reside, and I have usually found that our young men, after they had served two or three years in camp, and just about the time they began to be somewhat proficient, dropped out, and one of their reasons is that the pay is entirely insufficient to induce them to remain longer. By gradually increasing the pay, they would be induced to remain longer in the force, and thus our militia would be considerably improved.
As regards the canteen, I have not much to say. I notice considerable feeling against it, not so much because people believe that lager beer or the ordinary ale is so injurious, as because they believe that if these liquors be sold, whisky will also be smuggled in, I am not so much afraid, however, of the danger of thus destroying our young men by the occasional use of a few glasses of ale or lager beer, as some people are. I do not think that lager beer or common ale is very injurious if drunk in moderation, so long as they drink nothing stronger. But the real danger, of course, consists in allowing the sale of spirituous liquors, which is usually done when ale or lager beer is allowed to be sold.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: I fully endorse the views expressed with regard to increasing the pay of the militia in camp by grading it in the way advised by the major general, namely, giving an increase each year of service. That would induce our young men to continue in the service, whereas at present many of them enroll the first year and drop out the second or third. Now, there is another matter to which I would call the attention of the hon. minister, a very important matter and one that has not been touched upon. The main object of the hon. minister must be to have every one who is enrolled in the militia an efficient officer or soldier. And how is that to be accomplished ? There is only one way, and that is to have military instruction and drill made a part of the education of the youths of this country. I am fully aware that the minister has not complete control in this matter, for education is In charge of the provincial

authorities. But he can advise the local governments that they instruct their educational officers, the superintendent of education and each of the inspectors to require that military drill be taught in the public schools. If that is done, the children null bo inspired with military ardour and zeal in the interests of the service, and every one of them thus taught will be good loyal citizens. Youthful impressions are very lasting, and in the words of the old proverb : train up a child In the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it. One who is trained on soldierly lines in youth will become a soldier in reality. I do not say that the hon. minister should go to the expense of giving the schools the Lee-Enfield rifle or the Oliver equipment-these, perhaps, will be more useful in the hands of militia men. But the hon. minister has a lot of obsolete equipment that can be placed at the disposal of the schools-the academies, higher schools at first to have the supply, and as the complement of obsolete arms and equipment in store grows greater, he can supply the smaller schools also. The children will be pleased to see the racks in their schools, because they would be a sort of ornament as well as being designed for use. Then, instead of occupying their spare time in mere racing about or perhaps in idle rude play, let them be drawn up regularly as soldiers and engaged in drill. Let them have 'their officers as soldiers do-their colonels, majors, adjutants, captains and non-coms-without, of course, the commission. This will give them a certain amount of inspiration and rivalry, each one to rise in the ranks. Nor should this Instruction be confined to the boy youths alone-let it be given to the girls as well. Let them have a separate drill, apart from the boys. I feel satisfied that the training thus brought about will be of immense advantage to them. It will give them fine physique, beautiful and easy carriage, graceful manners and a martial bearing.


Mr. GOURLEY.: They have that now.
iMr. KAULBACH. They are supposed to have it, and many of them have, but there are exceptions. They have this system in Germany and there is no reason why we should not adopt it in Canada. With such a system, every youth, when he arrives at the age of sixteen, will feel himself fully equal to meet the requirements of the soldier with very little training. When he goes to camp, he will easily become a well-drilled soldier, and need not go into the awkward squad. This is the ground-work of the success of the militia service, and I feel satisfied that it is a step iu the right direction. I hope the hon. minister will accept the view I have here suggested and will communicate with the local governments and let them make the necessary arrangements to see that the idea is carried into effect.
10S


Mr. PUTTEE.: Surely the hon. gentleman (Mr. Kaulbach) was not speaking seriously. But, in case he was serious, I desire to say a word so that, sitting near him, I may not be supposed by my silence to endorse his sentiments. Surely, he does not ask us to take our little children from their games and train them in the arts of war. Our little children ! that is surely a most outrageous proposition. He gave us the proverb of training up a child in the way he should go, and how did he apply it ? Let us train up' the children in the arts of war, train them to be colonels and captains, train them to fight among themselves, and they will fight when they get older. Surely, we are not going to have that sort of thing in Canada. So far as our militia is concerned, we want to do away with the glamour, the tinsel, the show of it. It is necessary that we should have a militia force, but let us make it democratic, encourage our young fellows to have that patriotism that will make them feel that to them we look as defenders of the country, and that to defend it properly they must learn something of the art of war, mainly -they must learn to shoot. It is not the right-about-turn and so on, the mere drill and mechanical movements that we need to teach our children. If the Boer war has taught us anything, it has taught us that men from farms, men untrained, if they can shoot, are good soldiers, and that mechanical soldiers are not the ones who can win battles in our day. I did not intend to take any part in this discussion. But when I hear an hon. member seriously-I believe he was serious-advising that we should take our young children away from their play, give them guns and bayonets and drill them as soldiers


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: They will like it better than any play.


Arthur W. Puttee: That may be my hon. friend's (Mr. Kaulbacli's) opinion, but it is not mine, and I have the right to hold and to express my own opinion. I do earnestly protest against this being taken as the sentiment of this House. At any rate, for my part, I must dissent from it. I protest against trying to make out that we in Canada are a military people. We are not a military people, we are a democratic people, but not for that reason the less loyal or the less patriotic.


Mr. ROBINSON (West Elgin).: I have no *desire to create a jingo spirit amongst the people of Canada, but I wish to see our Canadian boys so trained that, should occasion arise that when they were called upon to defend our country they will be able to do *so with success. To do this they must be taught from their youth. We heard this afternoon that a new mode of warfare has been developed. WTe find that drilling in battalions, which my bon. friend; from Victoria would advocate, is of very little use



nowadays. A man must learn to slioot and shoot straight ; he that can do that best is the best soldier. We must teach our boys to shoot, but first, we must teach them discipline. And 1 may tell my hon. friend from Lunenburg (Mr. Kaulbach) that an the province of Ontario our people have uot much of the jingo spirit, but they are teaching their children how to drill, and I thins that that is what our school teachers, even our school ma'ams must teach.
I am proud to see the spirit that is arising amongst our young people, in Ontario at least, in order that they may be able to defend themselves when the time shall arrive. The government should encourage this sxairit by training them properly how to march and how to shoot. I think that is the object this government has in view, so that within a few days, if the need should arise, we may have 200,000 young fellows ready to fall into line. If the people of other countries knew that, they would hesitate before they attacked us. I want to. say a word also with regard to the question of a canteen. I am not going to advocate a canteen. If these young men have been properly trained at home by their mothers and by their fathers to leave liquor alone, and if it is known that when they go out to drill there will be a canteen where they can get soft drinks, as the hon. member for Victoria calls it, or where they can get liquor, their parents may hesitate to encourage their boys to go to these military drills. I believe that men who do not touch liquor are far healthier and can march further in a day. General Wolseley, who was lately commander-in-chief of the British army, when he was in this country, marched 4,000 Canadians up to the North-west, and they did not have a drop of liquor, and he did not lose a man. My hon. friend from Victoria (Mr. Prior) might not be able to do that. I would not like my boys to join a contingent where there was a canteen of soft or hard drinks put under their nose. I think our young men do not require it. Plenty of excellent water can be found, and if you give them plenty of good food I do not think they need a canteen.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I hope the opinion expressed by the hon. member for Winnipeg (Mr. Puttee) is not the opinion that prevails in that great western country. For my part I am a man of peace, when peace can he maintained with dignity; but I think that war is the noblest employment of mankind when waged in defence of right. A nation that is not prepared to fight at any moment, a nation that has a man, woman or child, who is not prepared at any moment to fight in defence of their own country, is not worthy the protection of a government. The one thing which is creditable in the history of the Boer war is the fact that every Boer man, woman and child is prepared to sacrifice his or her life in defence Mr. ROBINSON (West Elgin).
of their country, a country that was not a glorious country or with glorious traditions in any sense, but still they are prepared to fight for their country. That is the most creditable thing that can be said about that awful oligarchy. Sir, I have been delighted to see in my own part of this Dominion a splendid military spirit growing up among our people, an aggressive military spirit, a spirit that gives a basis for high and dominant feeling. No nation is worth anything where a high and proud feeling does not characterize the whole people. After forty years of adherence to a proud and noble policy, the British Empire adopted a cowardly policy; and I was glad the other night to hear some hon. gentleman revile the British government for the miserable conduct they exhibited a few years ago in giving away that splendid territory in. Maine; and 1 hope that if ever the mayor of Ashburton appears in Canada, some man will horse-whip him from end to end of the country. I am an Imperialist of the strictest sect of the Imperialists, and, Sir,
I cannot characterize with sufficient contempt the policy of the British government for forty-five years. Every nation in the world stole her territory and insulted her, and down to the incident of Fashoda the British spirit never came back. The British nation, after they waged their great war with Napolean, that splendid and magnificent captain, the peer of all the greatest captains of the world, after they waged that war for twenty-two years, then up rose a weak race of demagogues, after 1830, after two generations, the British race has become decadent. After two generations they stood by and saw the ancient glory of that empire, which had been won by a succession of magnificent generations, thrown to the winds. Thank God, however, there are other British nations growing up in Australia, and in Canada, and in Africa, that will take a hand in the discussion of her foreign policy. I stand here to claim that from this moment when there is any weakness shown in any British cabinet with reference to her foreign policy, every Canadian in this House of Commons, every man in the House of Commons of Africa- which I hope will be established as a consequence of this war-every member of parliament in Australia, shall rise and demand that they have as much to say about the foreign policy of this empire as the British people. Why, Sir, a man born in London, stupid and ignorant, has more to say about the foreign policy of the British Empire than educated Canadians. Why, Sir, one Canadian has more horse-sense and more intelligence than a thousand Englishmen wrapped together. Now, when it comes to a discussion of the proper policy to follow,
I claim as much right as any man in the hall of St. Stephen's to discuss the foreign policy of this empire, and to settle it upon high and dignified lines, characteristic of the Bri-

tisli race for a thousand years down to 1830, when that period of disgrace and meanness began for the whole British people.
Now, I want to say a word or two with regard to the canteen. 1 do hope that the hon. member for Victoria, B.C., will not be able to allure the Minister of Militia and Defence .into establishing the canteen system so far as Nova Scotia is concerned. 1 understand the minister is rather popular with the ladies in my province, but I undertake to say that if he establishes a canteen in that province the mothers and sisters of Colchester will warn him never to set foot in that country. I quite agree with the hon. member for West Elgin (Mr. Bobinson) that it would be a disgrace ai the present time, when the whole world is moving towards the abolition of the canteen, to have it re-established in Canada. Why, Sir, Kitchener's army that captured Khartoum was a thoroughly teetotal army. There was no canteen, it was abolished when the soldiers began to march. In the United States navy, previous to actual battle, the canteen is abolished in order that the highest nerve and the highest qualities of the soldier, and the seaman, may be exhibited in the face of the enemy. Now, when the whole trend of military discipline is towards the abolition of the canteen, I want the Minister of Militia and Defence- because I am a Liberal upon this subject- to learn that so far as the maritime provinces are concerned, the sentiment of that people, the best educated people, is overwhelmingly against the canteen. I quite agree with the sentiment that no mother or no father will permit their boys to go into a militia camp if you are going to have the drunken orgies that are inseparable from the canteen. I quite agree with the hon. member for Victoria, B.C., that there may not be any harm in a glass of lager, but when you have a canteen, the drinking of that and stronger liquors will inevetiably take place with the consequent demoralization. I have always said that the ultimate political destiny of this continent was in Canada. Why, in fifty years hence the centre of political power on this continent will have been transferred from Washington to Ottawa. More than that, if we want to have a strong and powerful people here, we must have a trained teetotal people. I became a teetotaler because I am an Imperialist, because I believe to be an Imperialist you want to have the highest citizenship and the teetotaler exemplifies the highest citizenship in this country. He is healthy and he can endure provided he is not soaked in wine or liquor. Because I am an Imperialist and a teetotaler I oppose the re-establishment of the canteen. I want the hon. minister not to be entrapped by any of these appeals that we have Beard in regard to the improvement of the militia of this country.
108J


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: My hon. friend from Winnipeg (Mr. Puttee), it seemed to me, scarcely did justice to my hon. friend from Lunenburg (Mr. Kaulbach), and I must say that I dissent entirely from the views which were expressed by the hon. member for Winnipeg. I do not think that he succeeded in correctly presenting his real views to the House. My hon. friend must not forget that all we are inculcating and teaching in this country is the necessity of defence. My hon. friend has referred to the encouragement and fostering of the patriotic spirit. I would like to know what better way there is of encouraging a patriotic spirit than by teaching our young boys the importance of defending their country, and that their country is worth defending. I would like to point out to my hon. friend and this committee, that it does not follow that in the money we are expending annually and by the pains we are taking to teach dril. to our young men, we are inculcating a warlike or quarrelsome spirit. It is nothing of the kind. What we are teaching is, that we have a magnificent country, that we are an independent, self-respecting people, and that it is our duty to defend ourselves from the attacks of any one who may exhibit a desire to take this country away from us. Surely, if this is sound, the sooner we attempt to teach it to our boys in the schools the better it will be for us.
Two other matters have been the special subject of discussion. The first was in reference to the pay, which was referred to by my hon. friend from Victoria, B.C. (Hon. Mr. Prior), by the hon. member for South Norfolk (Mr. Tisdale), and others, and which was dealt with in the report of the major general. I think there is a good deal of force in what the major general has said, and I shall feel inclined to give his recommendation a trial. However, I do think that the adoption of his recommendation would not have the effect of bringing back to camp for a second or third year all the men who have gone out the first year. If it would have the effect of inducing a large percentage to return, it is certainly worth trying, although it would involve some additional expenditure. I think, as the hon. member for Victoria has pointed out, that our volunteers do not correctly apprehend their responsibility after enlisting. They do not look upon it as desertion, and I think if we took pains to let them thoroughly understand what the true position of affairs is, and what their responsibility is after having signed the roll and entered into a contract to go out for three years, it might have a good effect, and that, perhaps, some arrangement could be made to improve the existing condition. The existing condition to which the major general referred is not worse than it was two years ago, or five years ago, or ten years ago. It is probably not so bad as it was then. I think that this

year we will endeavour to instruct captains to issue a formal notice, which will he served upon the men some time before the camp, to, if possible, secure a larger attendance than in the past. The general lias suggested that something of this kind should be done, and we are now taking steps to see that it will be done, and I hope to be able to report, after the drill of this year, that this evil has not existed to the same extent as it has in the past. There is no doubt, too, that the man to whom we pay 50 cents the first year is a better man, and is worth more to the country, the second year, and we might very well afford to pay him an additional amount. This would be quite true of the third year. He will be worth more. If he cnooses to go on after that, because we want to bring in new men after the three years, we might keep on for a term of years the increased rate of pay.
In reference to the canteen ; this is a somewhat delicate question, but, I am bound to say that I think the militia could get along very well in camp without the use of intoxicating liquors. I am inclined to agree with the hon. member for West Elgin (Mr. Robinson) that cold water is not too bad a thing. When the hon. gentleman referred to Wolseley's historic march from eastern Canada up to the Red river, as it was called in those days, I remembered having read a series of articles published in Blackwood's magazine by Gen. Wolseley, who was then Col. Wolseley, describing the hardships of that march, and I remember that he said that he had learned a lesson from the hardy lumbermen of Canada, and that nothing was used on that march stronger than tea. He believed that there was nothing which would restore a tired and weary man as well as tea. He considered it infinitely 'superior to the grog which used to be issued to the British soldiers. There is a misapprehension as to the meaning of the word canteen. The canteen does not necessarily mean a place where liquor is sold. Canteens contain everything that is necessary to the comfort of a soldier, tobacco, cigars, soft drinks, such as ginger ale, and anything of that kind, and all sorts of articles that he may require. The canteen still exists, but we have passed regulations to exclude from it alcoholic liquors. Such liquors as ginger ale, soda water, and that sort of thing- buttermilk-some one says, are not excluded from the canteen, and will not be excluded. While personally I do not suppose that there would be any serious injury in a moderate amount of lager beer, still, I do think that there is such a strong feeling, as has been said, among the mothers and daughters and sisters in this country of the young men whom we want to go into camp, that we would find that if we were not pretty particular and pretty careful in this respect, that prejudice, that feeling-perhaps Mr. BORDEN (KinfeJs).
it is not right to call it a prejudice-would have a very considerable effect in interfering with the success of our camp. So far as I am concerned, I have been attending a camp for many years from which liquor has been excluded. I will not say that there never has been liquor drunk there, but it is against the rules of the camp, and it is not sold in the canteen. I believe that the condition of that camp is better than it was in the days when liquor was sold.


David Tisdale: It is not true that in military camps where spirits are prohibited according to the regulations, where a canteen exists, that in defiance of the regulations, they have spirits in the canteen. I trust the mernuer for Colchester (Mr. Gour-ley) will not repeat it again until he has better evidence for liis statement. It is unfair to the commander of the camps, to the commanding officers of the battalions, and to the officer of the day, to say that a canteen exists where it is prohibited. I agree with the hon. minister that there is a strong feeling against the canteen by, in my opinion, extreme people, tout my observation during fifteen years has been that the men who get intoxicated do so outside the camp. I am one of those who do not believe in these drastic means of protection for men or women ; I do not believe in legislating to have saints on earth. The wise way to govern men and women and to make them good, is to treat them as such. I have no doubt that friends of mine will strongly oppose what I am now saying, but I am conscientious in my opinion about it, and when I do believe that it is best for the men and for temperance in the end that the principle mentioned by the adjutant general be carried out, I am bound to stand up and defend my belief. If you do make a regulation and the responsible officers do not carry it out, then discharge the officers. There are a class of men who rebel against being compelled not to take what they think they have a right to take, and that particularly applies to beer. If you give these men soft drinks and beer they will stay in camp. I believe the adjutant general was wise in putting in his report this recommendation, and from my experience of fifteen years in camp, I believe it is right, and I am ready to defend it. The true temperance idea is not to go beyond what is reasonable and to take in moderation what a man believes he has a right to take. I am perfectly content that other people should not take liquor if they wish not to, but I say again that my experience is that the camps are in better order if you allow soft drinks and beer in the canteens. I believe that if it is an evil to have a cainteen, it is the lesser evil.


Frank Oliver: I wish to support the attitude of the Minister of Militia (Hon. Mr. Borden) in regard to the canteen. The hon. gentleman from South Norfolk (Hon. Mr. Tisdale)

has referred to the adjutant general as being favourable to the canteen. The adjutant general probably knows all about canteens, and he may know all about drill, but as the representative of a section of the Canadian people, I think I know more about the Canadian people and the sentiment of the Canadian people than he does. 1 take the responsibility of voicing what 1 believe to be that sentiment in this House, and it is in accordance with the position taken by the Minister of Militia.


Mr. HACKETT.: I had no intention of offering any remarks in reference to the militia estimates, but I am inspired by the eloquent language of the hon. gentleman from Colchester (Mr. Gourley) to say a word or two. I disagree altogether from what my hon. friend from Winnipeg (Mr. Puttee) has said in connection with military matters. I am an old man now, but I remember when I was a captain in the militia of Prince Edward Island before confederation, when the Fenians were threatening to invade the shores of Canada, and got into certain parts of western Canada, but when they found that the people of Prince Edward Island were ready to up and fight them, they hurried back across the line.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Edward Hackett: As British freemen we should endeavour by all means possible to instruct our children from the moment they are able to receive instruction to be able to protect their country. The Minister of Militia has shown great patience in connection with this matter, and I hope there will be no discussion of these estimates, because if there is any hon. gentleman on the floor of this House who deserves the gratitude and thanks of the people of Canada, it Is that hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Borden). We know that not only has he used his best exertions to prepare the contingents for South Africa, but that his own son went to the front in defence of his country and shed his rich young Canadian blood on the yellow veldts of South Africa. It is therefore, I say, that we should offer no obstruction to the estimates brought down by the hon. minister, and that we should do all in our power to have them passed without criticism.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Oh, no, not at all.


Edward Hackett: Only in this respect, of course. The estimates should be subject to the criticism that the money should be expended properly, and that such estimates should only be brought down as are required in the interests of the people of Canada. Then they should pass without undue criticism. I want to say one word in regard to the first contingent. When the tocsin of war was sounded and British subjects were driven from their homes in South Africa to seek refuge in the cities and towns of the
coast; when we were threatened-because when British subjects in South Africa had to leave their homes, you can never tell when we in Canada may be threatened with a like calamity-our young men rallied to the front. They were prepared to go and shed their blood dn defence of the hearths and homes of the empire. Prince Edward Island was called on to supply a certain number of young men, and we sent a full quota of that contingent. These men rallied round the flag when the occasion required. They were ready, and more than ready to go forward and fight in the defence of thedr country, and hundreds more would have been ready if they had been required. My hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Hon. Sir Louis Davies) is not in his seat. He has not a word to say with regard to this first contingent. The men who first volunteered to go and fight in South Africa are entitled to receive the same pay at least as those who went afterwards ; but we find that they received smaller pay than the other two contingents. Those who remember the battle of Paarde-berg, when the wily Cronje was driven to the last ditch, will remember that when the morning dawned two young men from Prince Edward Island lost their lives in front of the enemy. The names of those two young men, Riggs and Taylor, will be for ever enshrined in the history of Prince Edward Island and dn the history of Canada. They went to the front and were found in advance of the trenches. It was rash perhaps, but they were impetuous and determined that the Boers should be conquered that morning. Those two noble young men shed their life's blood in defence of the empire, and their names will be held in remembrance by Canada for many years to come. Their comrades were equally ready to surrender their lives if necessary; and therefore, having fought the battles of the empire and having returned from the battlefields of South Africa, I think it is unjust and unfair that they should not receive the same compensation as those who followed. I trust that the hon. Minister of Militia will see, as a matter of justice, that the men of the first contingent receive equal pay with those of the second and third contingents.


David Tisdale: The speech of the hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat has brought to my mind a statement which I wished to make to the minister, and it is my apology for troubling the committee with a word or two more. I shall most heartily endorse the action of the minister if he can see his way to bringing in an additional item for making, according to the arm of the service, the pay of the first contingent equal to that of the second and the third. I was not aware before that there was any difference except what might be caused by the distinction between the dif-

ferent arms of the service. I am not1 prepared to vote an increase for one arm of the service without doing the same for all. There are military reasons why infantry, cavalry and artillery get different rates of pay. It is not necessary to go into those reasons, because they are recognized in all the armies in the world. For instance, a cavalryman has a great deal more work to do than an infantryman, because he has to take care of his horse. In my younger days, when I was a horseman and was sometimes too far away to get any one to take care of my horse, I never went to bed until I saw that the horse was properly attended to. No man deserves to have a horse who will not take care of it. But recognizing the distinction between the different arms of the service, I agree with the hon. member for West Prince (Mr. Hackett) that those who went first should, if possible, be even better recompensed than those who went later, though all were animated by the same spirit. So that if the minister can see his way to making an increase of that sort, I shall be most happy to support it.


George William Fowler: The hon. gentleman who has just sat down is astray on this matter of pay. I do not think there is any distinction made in the rate of pay between cavalry and infantry. An infantryman and a cavalryman in the militia get the same rate of pay-50 cents a day. The allowance for a horse is one dollar a day ;( but that is for the horse not the man. So the argument of my ihon. friend falls to the ground. I cannot speak with authority with respect to the artillery, but I think the same thing is true of them. Therefore if that argument is used against the first contingent getting the same pay as the second and third, it is perfectly baseless. I think the first contingent should be placed in the same position as' the second and third. Surely this country is able to do justice by these men. Even if a contract was made, we are not necessarily to be bound by it in our treatment of the men. We should look at the matter from the standpoint of equity, and on that ground it seems to me the men of the first contingent are deserving of the same consideration that is given to the men. of the second and third.
Militia-Salaries and wages, $80,000.


Edward Gawler Prior: Will the hon. gentleman state in what the increase of $7,000 consists ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I may say that one of the results of my hon. friend the Postmaster General's Labour Act of last session is that we have to increase the rate of wages in the different stores. *


Edward Frederick Clarke: What are the particulars of the increase ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Where we paid $1 a day we are Mr. TISDALE.
paying $1.25, and where we paid $1.25 we are paying $1.50 and perhaps more. Then we have had to make some additions owing to the largely increased amount of work due to the despatch of the contingents. So far as possible all that extra work has been charged to a special vote, but it was not always possible to do it. In many cases it was impossible to separate the two things, and that, generally speaking, is the reason for this increase, which, after all, considering the amount of work and the amount of stores, is not very large.
Hon. Mr. PRIOR, But it is not for expenditure that has already taken place, but for work to be done the next few years.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The work is going on yet, and for many months to come there will be work caused by the return of the arms and armaments and putting them again into proper shape, which causes the necessity for increased employment. But the first reason I gave is the principal one, namely, that the rate of wages has been pretty generally increased.


Edward Gawler Prior: This $7,000 is distributed over a large number of men, whose wages has been increased.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Several hundred.


David Tisdale: Is this entirely composed of temporary expenses, or are there any additional permanent appointments?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: No.
Militia properties, $203,200.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: This item is composed of maintenance, $35,000; namely, rents, $10,000; fuel, $8,000; light, $9,500; water rates, $1,500; removing snow, $1,000; sundries, $5,000. That is exactly the same as last year. Construction and repairs are reduced from $193,000 to $108,200. There is an amount of $70,000 for the usual repairs divided among the different districts :
District No. 1, London	 $ 8,000
District No. 2, Toronto	 10,000
District No. 3, Kingston	 8,000
District No. 4, Ottawa	 2,000
District No. 5, Montreal	 '8,000
District No. 6, St. John	 5,000
District No. 7, Quebec	 10,000
District No. 8, Fredericton	 8,000
District No. 9, Nova Scotia	 5,000
District No. 10, Winnipeg	 2,000
District No. 11, Victoria, B.C		2,000
District No. 12, Charlottetown_____	2,000
The rest of the money is to be spent on rifle ranges. At Windsor,-Brantford. Peterborough, Brockville, Sherbrooke, Fredericton, $200,000. Repairs to present ranges, $0,-
000.	Additional armouries, $8,000; fortification walls, Quebec, $20,000; cartridge factory, Quebec, $8,000; Royal Military College, two

new servants' quarters, $1,800; geiieral repairs to college, $5,000; additions to dormitory and new sanitary lieating apparatus, $4,200. Sewer connection Wolseley barracks, London, $5,000 ; painting drill ball, Charlottetown, $1,000. Grand total, construction and repairs, $108,200.


George William Fowler: I understood the hon. minister to say that there was $8,000 to be expended on district No. 8, Fredericton. What is that for ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: It is for the maintenance of the barracks at Fredericton-the repairs and improvements necessary-and also in St. John for stores and buildings, and any urgent repairs that may be required.


George William Fowler: The department has valuable property at Sussex, its military farnj. A portion of that farm is being injured by the river that flows through it, owing to proper precautions not having been taken to protect the banks of the river. The result is that valuable parts of the farm are annually washed away.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: We have spent a good deal of money trying to protect it.


George William Fowler: It has not been expended in the right way. It is really a very serious matter. The railway runs through the farm as well, and the river is working its way towards the railway, and there is a dispute between the military and railway authorities as to which should do the work. But while they are disputing, the water is eating away the banks every year. It would be well to take that matter into consideration. I would also like to speak of the armoury, for which there was a vote in the estimates last year.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Yes, in the Public Works estimates.


George William Fowler: The armoury at Sussex. That was previous to the 7th of November last. Is it the intention to go on with that very necessary work ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Undoubtedly.


George William Fowler: Have contracts been let or tenders asked for ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: That is a matter for the Public Works Department, and I know nothing about it. We make the requisitions on that department. That matter will come up in the discussion of the Public Works estimates. I have nothing to do with it except send the plans to the Public Works Department and the requisition for the building.


George William Fowler: I would like to know whether the department has changed its
mind or is still strongly convinced of the necessity of the work ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The Militia Department made up its mind after careful investigation, and has not changed it.


George William Fowler: I am very glad to hear it


Edward Gawler Prior: It seems to me that the decrease of $25,000 in the vote is a retrograde movement.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: There was a very large increase last year.
Hon. Mr. PRIOR, The chief superintendent of stores in his report this year says there is urgent necessity for the erection of a new building at Kingston and Toronto.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: We have nothing to do with new buildings at all in this vote.


Edward Gawler Prior: Has the hon. gentleman requisitioned the ' Public Works Department to put up those buildings ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Yes, and they will be built. I think the hon. gentleman will vote it in the supplementaries.


Edward Gawler Prior: The superintendent of stores says that owing to the inadequacy of the buildings and there present condition, it is impossible to either increase the supplies or properly care for the military stores already there.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: No doubt, we need more buildings.


Edward Gawler Prior: Of course, it is of the greatest importance that we should have a full supply of necessary stores. The hon. minister knows that when he was called upon at a moment's notice to outfit the first contingent, he had to buy a tremendous lot of stores at the last moment, and at largely increased prices as compared with what he would have paid had they been bought in ordinary course, and kejit in store.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Prior) no doubt has seen the splendid stores building that is being erected in Ottawa just back of the drill hall. This will relieve the situation, and enable us to keep a larger quantity of supplies than we have done in the past. With reference to the observations of my hon. friend from King's (Mr. Fowler) about the land owned by the Militia Department at Sussex, I can only say that I was not aware of the condition of things mentioned by him-that is, that there was any dispute between the Militia Department anil the Railway Department as to responsi-

bllity for work to be done tliere. We certainly accept the responsibility witli regard to a portion of it. And I was under tile impression that it had been effectively done. My officers are here listening to this discussion, and I may say that I will at once, tomorrow, have inquiry made with reference to the matter. And I shall ask the officers at St. John to go there and make a report on the existing condition. I will have a conference with the Railway Department, and see whether there is any question as between the two departments as to responsibility.


George William Fowler: I would ask if any arrangement has been made for the care of the farm during the current year ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Not yet; the matter is under consideration at this moment.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: Has any appropriation been made for the rifle range of the 75th Regiment, Lunenburg ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I have already stated that an item of $20,000 is included in this vote to assist the rural battalions in procuring proper rifle ranges.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: And Lunenburg will be included ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The money is not yet apportioned. It i's for rural battalions, and the 75th is a rural battalion.
Militia-Chargeable to income-Warlike and other stores, $55,000.


David Tisdale: How near do we come to manufacturing at the Quebec cartridge factory all the ammunition that we require ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I am happy to say that we now manufacture all that we require ; and, after the 1st of July, we shall manufacture all the shells and cartridges of the larger calibre that will be required. In fact, we have countermanded an order which had been sent to the War Office last year, amounting to some $55,000, and we are going to manufacture the shells, &c., covered by that order at Quebec. And the money we would have sent to England will be spent In Canada.


David Tisdale: Will the hon. gentleman be able to accumulate a surplus for distribution ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Yes.


David Tisdale: Sufficient, do you think ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Yes.


Frederick William Borden: 


David Tisdale: I am glad to hear that. *


Edward Gawler Prior: Is the factory in a position to manufacture the 40-pounder [DOT]shrapnel and the common shell ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Yes.


Edward Gawler Prior: What they have been manufacturing up to the present time is only the 6-pounder ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Yes, that is all. But we are putting in machinery, and by the 1st of July we hope to manufacture the other.


Jabel Robinson: Does the factory use smokeless powder ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: We use cordite, which, I understand, is smokeless.


Edward Gawler Prior: The superintendent of stores calls attention to the fact that it will be necessary to import a supply of Lee-Enfield rifles to have sufficient on hand to cover possible demands. Is it the intention of the minister to manufacture them here V


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: That is my hope, though it may be premature to express it. I may say that within the last two or three days I have learned something that leads me to believe that a factory will be 'started in Canada. We had a vote last session of $240,000. When in England I had almost arranged for the purchase of Lee-Enfield rifles. But, as I understood that improvements were being considered, and might be made, and I wanted to get the benefit of these, and also as I hoped that by offering to buy a larger quantity of rifles than could be paid for by the amount voted, I might encourage some manufacturer to establish a factory in Canada, I did not complete the purchase. So, we have the money in the treasury.


Edward Gawler Prior: I suppose the hon. gentleman expects to keep a larger stock of clothing on hand than in the past ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I hope to. I am sorry, but I must go now. and the remaining items will have to stand over.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Before the hon. minister goes, I would like to call his attention to something that, I think, ought to receive consideration at the hands of the government. It is with reference to the remounts that are being bought in Canada for the Imperial army. The hon. minister may 'say that he has no control over the matter : but, I am sure that representation made from his department and the Department of Agriculture to Major Dent would result in having the purchase made

on lines that would be more beneficial to the farmers of Canada than those now followed. My information is, that Major Deni, while in Canada, purchasing horses, to-day is buying through a single agent in Montreal and another in Toronto, who get a substantial sum for every horse that passes the examination there. Buyers who go out amongst the farmers to pick up these horses say it would be much better if an advertisement were sent out, and in each town a day was set when Major Dent and his assistant could 'select and purchase horses. Or, if this was thought not desirable, a time could be set when buyers could purchase them in the country and sell direct to Major Dent in Toronto, instead of to Walter Har-land 'Smith, who receives a substantial sum for each of them. Now, the information I have is this-Mr. Walter Harland Smith sends out buyers and says : I will 'allow you for every horse that passes the examination, $105. These horses will cost the War Department, probably, $145 or $150 on the average. The result is, that the purchaser who picks them up all over the country is obliged to buy at a figure which will enable him to sell at $105 each and pay for the culls left on his hands. It would be better to divide the profits between the buyer who picks the horses up and the farmer who sells them, instead of giving a middleman, without reason, this large amount, taken out of the buyer and the farmer. I thought that representations from the government would prevent that being done. I was talking to one of the buyers yesterday, and he told me that they were obliged to pay smaller prices to the farmers for the horses than they would be able to pay but for this arrangement.


The MINISTER OP MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The hon. gentleman has rightly supposed that I would say that we were in no way responsible. I may add that the Minister of Agriculture and myself were both quite ready to advise and assist the Imperial officers who came here, in any way in our power. Our services were offered in that behalf, particularly by the Minister of Agriculture. I do not know how far they were accepted, but I do know that Col. Dent is absolutely responsible for what is being done, and that he has had all the assistance he was willing to accept from the Department of Agriculture and from my own department. The British government sent him here, and sent assistants with him. They are paying all the bills. We have absolutely nothing more to do with it than we have to do with paying the hills for the war in South Africa. The British government are very much inclined to do their business in their own way, and we are not at all responsible. I regret if the result has been that the farmers, the owners of horses, are not getting what they ought to receive, or if some intermediate party is
getting more than he ought to. This discussion may have the effect of bringing especially this matter to the attention of Col. Dent, and I will say to the hon. gentleman that 1 shall be happy to see that a copy of the ' Hansard ' containing what has been stated here is sent to him as soon as it is printed.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am glad the hon. minister has intimated his willingness to do that. 1 am still of the opinion that if representations were made to the War Office of the Imperial government, setting forth the unfairness of the system by which the horses are bought, they would give instructions by which that trouble might he avoided.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: That might be done. In addition to what I have already said, I will promise that a copy of this debate shall be sent to Lord Strathcona, our High Commissioner. I may say that Lord Strathcona has interested himself a great deal in this matter, and has induced the British government to buy horses in Canada. It is largely owing to the representations made by this government through Lord Strathcona that Col. Dent has come here now.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I have brought the matter up to-night because I know that a consignment will be shipped to Toronto, today or to-morrow, and it is necessary that at the earliest possible moment public attention should be called to these complaints.
North-west Mounted Police-Pay of force, $182,500.


The PRIME MINISTER.: The committee will see that there is an increase of $46,000 in these estimates over those of last year. The appropriation which was voted by parliament last year was $353,750, but I am sorry to say that we could not keep the expenditure within that figure, and we shall have to ask at a later stage a further appropriation of $60,000 ; that is to say, we find it is not possible to maintain the force for less than $400,000. This is the estimate for a force of 500 men and over 400 horses. When I took charge of the department in 1806. the expenditure in that year was $504,072.29. We thought that we could increase the number of the force and bring the expenditure down to about $300,000. But the following year the expenditure was $369,628; iu 1898-9 it rose to $402,628; in 1S99-1900 the expenditure was $351,583. Last year we took an appropriation for $353,750, but we found that it is not possible to maintain the force on that appropriation, that is to say, a force of 500 men and 400 horses. We find that the expenditure will range about $800 per man. We thought at one time it would be possible gradually to decrease the force, and that as the country was settled a less number of men would be

required. But iustead of decreasing the force we are compelled to distribute it oyer a larger area. At present we have nine principal depots:	At Itegina, Calgary,
Macleod, Prince Albert, Lethbridge, and so on; and we have about seventy different stations or places where we have certain members of the police force. In most of these small stations we have from one to three men, in some as many as five. At the principal depots, at Calgary, Macleod, Prince Albert and Lethbridge we have a number ranging from twenty upwards. The duties of these men are not only those of ordinary policemen, but they have to discharge other services to the settlers. For instance, as is well known by the hon. members from the North-west Territories, the police force are called upon to perform the very important duty of putting out prairie fires. That country is very liable to fires, and it is the duty of the men in the summer time to protect the settlers from prairie fires. Settlement is now proceeding north of the Saskatchewan and towards the Athabasca river and the Peace river, where there is a wooded country, and the services of the police are of the nature of bushrangers throughout that territory. Policemen are also called upon to put in force the Act against the admission of diseased cattle. These various duties compel the men to travel a good deal from place to place, and necessarily increase the expenditure. There is no increase in the pay of the men, which remains the same as it was before; but there is an increase in the different items. In subsistence, forage, fuel and light, there is an increase of $17,873; in clothing, repairs, renewals, horses, arms and ammunition, there is an increase of $20,873; in scouts, guides, billeting, transport of men and expenses of that character, there is a small increase of $2,500; then, new buildings and repairs, $5,000, making a total increase in the estimates over last year of $46,250. There is no increase in the number of men.


Edward Gawler Prior: Who is the superintendent of this police force ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: The superintendent of the force is Major Perry.


Edward Gawler Prior: Was he the senior officer then ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: No, I do not think he was the senior officer. Mr. Mc-Illree was the senior officer.


Edward Gawler Prior: That is Major Perry who was in the Yukon some time ago ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes.


Edward Gawler Prior: Would the right hon. gentleman inform us what that $17,000 is for particularly ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: It is mainly for subsistence. In the items of fuel and light,
there is very little increase. The fuel that we use is chiefly wood and coal, and it is all supplied by tender.


Edward Gawler Prior: The principal amount is for subsistence ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes. The light is not supplied by tender. In most of the places where we have depots such as Cal-garv, Regina, Macleod, Prince Albert and other places, the light is supplied by electricity. Where we have small stations there is no charge for light, because the men are chiefly boarded, and the light is supplied.


Edward Gawler Prior: The force used to consist of a thousand men, and there are now only five hundred men. Are some of the men in the Yukon Territory included in the 500 ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: No, we have another item for them. We have 250 men in the Yukon.


Edward Gawler Prior: These 500 men are in the North-west Territories ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes. These items are simply for the force in the Northwest Territories.


George William Fowler: Do I understand the right hon. gentleman to say that there was an expenditure of over $500,000 when he took office ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes.


George William Fowler: What was the number of men then ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: It was about 700.


Arthur W. Puttee: Can the right hon. gentleman give me any information as to the medals which were promised to the exmembers of this force who took part in the North-west rebellion ? I understand that an order in council was passed providing for the distribution of these medals some time ago, and they have not been received yet.


The PRIME MINISTER.: The medals are on the way from England.
Clothing, repairs, renewals, horses, arms and ammunition, medical stores and stationery, $55,-
000.


Edward Gawler Prior: There is an increase of over $20,000 in this item.


The PRIME MINISTER.: The explanation of this increase as stated is that the appropriation was too small. We cannot do with less.


Edward Gawler Prior: Simply a little more required on each of these items ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes.


Edward Gawler Prior: Can the right hon. gentleman tell us what rifle the North-west


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: mounted police are armed with ? Is it the Lee-Enfield carbine ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: The force are armed with the Winchester rifle, the Lee-Metford carbine, the Lee-Enfield revolver, and they have a few guns,


Edward Gawler Prior: Maxim guns


The PRIME MINISTER.: " No, there are two 7-pounders, four 9-pounders, and two mortars.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: This is a pretty large increase from last year to be accounted for by the upward tendency of values in one year. Has the force been increased since last year ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: No, the force has not been increased, but last year we took an appropriation of $353,750. I have stated to the committee already that we could not keep the expenditure within that figure, and I will have to ask for a supplementary vote of $60,000. To maintain 500 men and 400 horses we cannot do with less than about $800 per man. I hope we will be able to reduce it in future years, perhaps this year, but the committee will readily understand that in the last few years the force has been somewhat demoralized by the changes which have taken place in order to send men to the Yukon and to take men back and send them to South Africa. We have had to bring in a number of new recruits, and the displacement alone has cost a great deal of money. That is the reason why I think the expenditure has been larger than it was estimated for. I believe that with normal conditions we would be able to reduce the cost of a man to a less figure than $800.


George William Fowler: Has the force been kept up to its usual strength ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: There were 700 men when we took office. We have reduced the number to 500.


George William Fowler: You have 250 additional men in the Yukon ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes.


George William Fowler: And 500 in the North-west Territories ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes.


George William Fowler: That makes 750 men altogether ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes.


George William Fowler: So that instead of the force being reduced it has been increased by 50 men ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: No, my hon. friend will remember that the Yukon was not in existence at that time. We take one appropriation for the force in the Northwest Territories, and for the force in the Yukon we take another appropriation.


George William Fowler: Yes, but they are all mounted police ?	*


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes, all mounted police.


George William Fowler: I would like to ask the right hon. minister if he could give the figures for medical stores and stationery separately ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: I could not give my hon. friend these figures separately at this moment. The figures for stationery and medical stores are between $3,000 and $4,-
000.


George William Fowler: But you could not say how they are divided ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: No.


Edward Gawler Prior: What is the maximum price that the government allows to be paid for horses for remounts ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: One hundred dollars.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: Upon whose recommendation was the force reduced ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Upon the recommendation of the minister.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I have had some experience in the North-west Territories, and I think if there is one thing which would not be justifiable it would be the reduction of the police force which is one of the most competent bodies of the kind that I know of. I have had some experience in stockraising, I lived for a time in the North-west Territories, and I may say that if there is a body of men in the world that ought to be respected and honoured, it is this police force. I speak as an eastern man, and I say that instead of a reduction I would urge an increase in the force, because settlers all over the country are complaining of the reduction that took place. In reference to the statement of the right hon. gentleman in regard to fire guards, I may say that the little ranch that I was on was saved by these men who came at an extraordinary rate of speed when notice was given. They are the most extraordinary men in the world. The fire was sighted at what I thought several miles from our place, but it came bounding on and within an hour was quite near, but these men went to work with the appliances they have for fighting fires and they saved the properties of the neighbouring ranchers. If any body of people in this country deserve support I believe it is this body. To reduce their number would be to cripple their usefulness. The settlers that I heard from in all parts of the country complained of the reduction of the force that had been made.


The PRIME MINISTER.: My hon. friend {Mr. Gourley) lias paid a very just tribute to the police force. It is acknowledged to be one of the most efficient bodies of the kind in the world. It is not proposed to reduce the number of men, but I think that by careful administration we can reduce the cost of the maintenance of the men. We estimate it now at $800 per man. That is the estimate on which this appropriation that we are now asking is based. The force is coming back to normal conditions again, the Yukon is becoming settled more and more and perhaps we will be able to decrease the number of the force in the Yukon. As to the North-west Territories, I do not see that for some years to come we can very well reduce the number of the men. No doubt as the country develops the settlers wil be able themselves to perform the services which are now rendered by the police. But while that is true of the older part of the Territories, the settlement is advancing north of the Saskatchewan, and as we take mounted police from the settled parts we will probably have to send them amongst the new settlers. For some years I do not see that we can very well reduce the number of men.
New buildings and repairs, $15,000.


The PRIME MINISTER.: The increase of $5,000 is due to the fact that we have to renew the foundations of our buildings, which are some twenty years old now, at Calgary and Regina and other places.
Mounted Police, Yukon territory, $450,000.


The PRIME MINISTER.: While there was a large increase in the other item, there is a large decrease here. That is due to the fact that the facilities for communication in the Yukon are better, living is cheaper and consequently we think that we can supply 250 men for $450,000 instead of $500,000 as last year.


Edward Gawler Prior: Is that for the erection of new buildings or for the rent of buildings ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: It is for new buildings.


Hon. Mr. ROSS.: I might remind the House that the North-west Mounted' Police force was originally organized by Sir A. A. Dorion, who was Minister of Justice in the Mackenzie government, and afterwards Chief Justice of Quebec. The regulations prepared for the force at that time are those which exist at the present day.
Compensation to members of the North-west Mounted Police for injuries received in the discharge of duties, $2,500.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I may read the following schedule of those who are now receiving compensation under this vote :


Seymour Eugene Gourley: Duggan, J. P., synovitis, 23 rents per day. Guernsey, Charles, rheumatism, 23 cents per day



[Stage Direction]
Canada Gazette, $7,000.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The increase of $1,000 here is owing to the increased price of paper and the advance in wages.


Edward Gawler Prior: Is that due to the paper combine ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I would not like to answer that too definitely.


Mr. HENDERSON.: I thought we were told this afternoon by the Hon. Mr. Sutherland that paper has become cheaper.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: That is, cheaper than in former days.
Miscellaneous printing, $40,000.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The Secretary of State, under whose department this is, gives me the same explanation, namely, that the increase is due to the increased price of paper and higher wages.


Mr. WILSON.: This is a very thin House to-night, and as it may be that these items have be.en left over for discussion, perhaps some hon. gentlemen who are not present would like to discuss them.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I have no objection to allowing any of these items to stand.


Uriah Wilson: I want to know why these items were left over.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: These items have not been presented to the House before.


Edward Gawler Prior: When did this increase of wages commence ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I cannot give the time.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: $30,000 was the original amount and the vote is increased by $9,200 or over 30 per cent in one year. It does not seem to me that the average increase of wages throughout the country would account for this.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Nor wages alone, but paper and wages.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Well, even paper and wages. I do not know that paper is so very much dearer than it was. We are getting more paper mills and pulp is being turned out in immense quantities. Have there been any more men employed ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: If my hon. friend desires it, I shall be very glad to get the information in detail. All the information that has been furnished to me is that this increase is due to an increase of about 25 per cent in paper and wages. I do not think there is any fixed standard for the number of persons employed in that department.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand that the government has not been getting all the printing done in the Printing Bureau, hut has been letting it out to friendly printing associations and newspaper offices at increased prices. Probably this accounts for the increase ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I am sure there is no printing done outside that can be done in the Printing Bureau. It is only when the Printing Bureau is overcrowded that anything is done outside.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That is not giving the slightest information with regard to this item. Did that account for the increase, or was all this increase in the work of the Printing Bureau ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: That is my advice in the memorandum furnished me.
Expenses in connection with the Canada Temperance Act, $1,000.


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


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: $500 is only sufficient to hold one election, and there is reason for believing there will be two.
Salaries and contingencies of the office of the Paris agency, $3,500.


The PRIME MINISTER.: This is the same vote as usual.


Mr. CLANCY.: This item is in connection with Mr. Fabre's office. The right hon. First Minister will remember that there was considerable discussion on that matter, and some questions were asked as to whether Mr. Fabre would maintain the present outfit in Paris or not. He has a large suite of rooms there which I understand are wholly unnecessary to be maintained in
connection with his position. I believe Mr. Fabre has done very valuable service, and I would not be opposed to keeping up his office as it has been kept up in the past; but there has been a good deal of broadening out there. Perhaps the government are able to state whether the present scale of expense is to be maintained.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I am sorry to say I cannot give my hon. friend all the explanations he would like to have; but the present item is the same as we have voted for the last fifteen or eighteen years, and therefore it implies no new departure. If I might give my candid opinion, I would say that the appropriation is altogether insufficient. The quarters in which Mr. Fabre has maintained the office, all those who have been in Paris must acknowledge to be quite insufficient and quite unworthy of the position of Canada. It is in a good location in the centre of Paris, but in that locality Mr. Fabre could only obtain for the rent he could pay a very inferior office indeed. Last year while the exhibition was going on Mr. Fabre was allowed to have a larger office, and I think all the Canadians who were in Paris agree that the departure was a wise one, so far as the exhibition was concerned. If I had the management of the office, I would not hesitate to ask for a larger appropriation, so that Mr. Fabre could have better quarters. If hon. gentlemen will look at the paper published by Mr. Fabre, called Paris-Canada, they will find in each issue the numbers of Canadians who visit the office from week to week, and they will find that they are very large. Mr. Fabre is able to give valuable information to all visitors. If the minister in charge were to ask for a larger appropriation so as to afford Mr. Fabre's offices larger and better and more worthy of Canada than he has to-day, I believe my hon. friend would be the very first to vote the appropriation.


James Clancy: I have not been finding fault on the grounds the right hon. gentleman has indicated. I have not found any fault with Mr. Fabre, because I believe he has done good service with his paper. If it is necessary to provide a better office for Mr. Fabre than he had before, I do not think any one would complain; but the question was asked what was the intention of the government -with regard to retaining the rooms which were obtained to serve the purposes of the Paris exposition.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I have a very distinct recollection that when hon. gentlemen opposite were on this side of the House, they criticised this item year after year very freely, and condemned it most unmercifully.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Not I.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I will admit that the hon. gentleman did not, but some of his friends

did. The question was asked, what did Mr. Fabre do for this money ? He was supposed to be acting as an immigration agent ; but one year he managed to bring out one immigrant, another year I think he brought out three, and in other years he brought none at all. And I think a good many years none at all. During the Paris exhibition, more commodious rooms were selected aud furnished and perhaps properly so for the occasion, but is. it necessary to keep these up and for no useful purpose ? It may be that Mr. Fabre does work in other lines, but, so far as information is given to the House, he does not seem to do much work for Canada beyond remaining there as a representative of Canada. A few Canadians may call on him but we would like to have some work done for the expenditure.


Uriah Wilson: I think this item might stand until the Agricultural Committee have heard Mr. Pedley, the head of the Immigration Department, who is to appear before the committee. He is immigrant agent over there, and we do not want to spend quite so much money for very little work. I do not believe that Mr. Fabre has sent us many immigrants.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I have no objection to let the item stand if the hon. gentleman desires. In answer to my hon. friend from Grey (Mr. Sproule) I recollect when this item was before the House in former years it was pretty well criticised, but I must pay him the compliment of never having joined in any of the criticisms on it, and I did not expect that he would depart from that very wise course to-day. With regard to the remarks of my hon. friend from Lennox (Mr. Wilson), 'I must say that Mr. Fabre is not doing very much in the way of sending immigrants from France to Canada.


Uriah Wilson: What is his business proper ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: I will have to refer my hon. friend to the appointment of Mr. Fabre by his own friends as immigration agent twenty years ago. He never did very much as such, and I doubt if any one we sent to Paris would ever do much hi that way. The French peasantry would be a most valuable class of immigrants. We do not want any other kind of immigration from Europe but farmers, and the French peasant would be very valuable, because he is thrifty, sober and frugal and has all the good qualities. But he is very much attached to the soil of his own country and does not care to immigrate. Mr. Fabre, however, finding that he could not do much as immigration agent, turned his activity into other lines. He has been a very valuable agent of Canada all over Europe. He edits a paper, he is a literary gentleman of eminent culture, and has performed the duties of agent for the Canadian people and government. His office is open to all Canadians and very) Mr. SPROULK
well patronized. There Is not a Canadian who visits France but goes to the office of Mr. Fabre and gets there valuable information. My hon. friend will agree with me that although Mr. Fabre may not do much in the way of sending immigrants to Canada, we have reached such a stage of development that we can afford to maintain an agency in the second city of Europe next to London, where Canada and its affairs may be appreciated and made known to the people of France.


Uriah Wilson: Why call him an immigration agent ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: My hon. friend has stated an objection to which I agree. I would rather call him the commissiary of the Canadian government.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. That is what he is called in Paris.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I would give him the title and the emoluments of a commissiary and perhaps might count on the support of my hon. friend.
Item allowed to stand.
Academy of Arts, $2,000.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: This is not a grant to any particular building, but to the Royal Academy established a few years ago for the cultivation of fine arts in Canada, organized by Mr. O'Brien and other eminent artists. This organization holds exhibitions from place to place. It is to have an exhibition in Toronto shortly.
Cost of arbitration respecting the accounts between the Dominion of Canada and the provinces of Ontario and Quebec (payments on account of services rendered may be made to members of the Civil Service, notwithstanding anything in the Civil service Act), $3,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: This is something we ought to have an explanation of.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: A few years ago the grants for this service were very much larger, because the business before the arbitrators was more extensive. The arbitration has now been reduced to a very small scope, as we have disposed of all the disputed matters except that known as treaty No. 3. Recently we were approaching a conclusion of that matter, but were asked to suspend proceedings in order that the government of Ontario might make a proposal for a change in the arrangements. That proposal was made a short time ago, but we have not yet been able to comply with it. The Act provides that the arbitrators may deal with the matters referred to them, not in a strictly legal spirit, hut in the broader spirit of equity, and make such awards as might seem just. But if the arbitrators come to any decision upon a question of law, they are obliged to state that in their; award, and in that case there is the right to appeal. There is no

appeal on ordinary questions of fact, but only on points of law. The government of Ontario desired to broaden the scope of the appeal, and proposed that we should introduce legislation to that effect. As there were three parties to the arbitration, Ontario, Quebec and the Dominion, we thought we should first ascertain whether the province of Quebec would join in this application. That province, however, dissented from the application, and the matter did not go further. At an early day the arbitrators will meet, and the whole business will close up.
Classification of old records of Canada In the office of the Privy Council (payments on account of this service may be made, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act), $1,000.
To assist in defraying the cost of the publication of documents Issued by the Canadian Mining Institute, $1,000.


Robert Laird Borden: Is this service proceeding from year to year ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: It has been going on some twenty years or so. The work is accumulating every year, and I am afraid we will never see the end of it.


Robert Laird Borden: I hope the hon. gentleman is not allowing it to get ahead of him.
Miscellaneous-Contribution towards publication of International Catalogue of Scientific Literaturo, $500.


Robert Laird Borden: That seems to he new. What is it ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: My hon. friend, the Secretary of State, has furnished me with a memorandum which shows that at the instance of the Royal Society of England, Lord Strathcona has arranged that Canada should join other nations in publishing the International Catalogue of Scientific Literature. The United Kingdom has agreed to take forty-five sets, Germany sixty-five, France thirty-five, and other nations in proportion. The Cape of Good Hope will take five sets, and Canada has promised to take five sets.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That is $100 a set ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Yes. it is an expensive work.
Some resolutions reported.
The PRIME MINISTER moved the adjournment of the House.


Robert Laird Borden: Perhaps the right hon. gentleman will tell us what business he expects to take up on Minday ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: It is our intention on Monday to take up the Election Bill, and then go on with supply, taking up the estimates of the Minister of Public Works, or of the Minister of Railways, if he is able to be here.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 11.20 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, April 22, 1901.
* The SPEAKER took the Chair at Three o'clock.

The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: By command of His Excellency, I desire to present to the House a message from the Colonial Office in answer to the address passed recently on the occasion of Her late Majesty's death.


MOTIONS AGREED TO WITHOUT DISCUSSION.
[Stage Direction]
Report of His Honour Judge Prendergast on the investigation of the alleged irregularities on the occasion of the sale of school lands in the province of Manitoba in June, 1900.-Hon. Mr. Sifton.
Approximate statement showing the amount standing on account of pre-emptions, grazing leases and timber, mineral and other Dominion lands.-Hon. Mr. Sifton.

[Stage Direction]
On the order :
House in committee on Bill (No. 89) respecting the Grand Falls Water Power and Boom Company.-Hon. Mr. Costigan.
Hon. Mr. COSTIGAN.: I find that the Bill as reported from the committee does not contain the exact wording of the amendments that were proposed by myself and agreed to by the other members of the committee. As it is a very important Bill, I would like to refer it back to the committee in order to consider these amendments. I therefore move that the order be discharged, and that the Bill be referred to the Select Standing Committee on Miscellaneous Private Bills.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. Sir Louis Davies).: Would the hon. gentleman say in what respect the change has been made, because we all agreed upon the amendments.


John Costigan: I am not a lawyer, the amendment was prepared by the law clerk.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: If it is only the phraseology, I do not want to object.


John Costigan: That is all. But I do not think the amendment covers the ground that I desired to have covered by the section prepared by the law clerk.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 50) to incorporate the Canadian Mutual Aid Society.-Mr. Sutherland (Essex).
[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 90) an Act respecting the Dominion Burglary Guarantee Company (Limited).-Mr. Bickerdike.
Bill (No. 107) to confer on the Commissioner of Patents certain powers for the relief of John Abell.-Mr. Bell (Addington).


Mr. BORDEN (Halifax) asked :: 1.	Has Mr. E. G. Russell been in the employ of the Crown or the Department of Railways and Canals, in connection with the Intercolonial Railway, at any time during the presont year?
2.	If so, when was he appointed and what were or are his duties, what is his official title or position, and when did he enter upon the performance of his duties?
3.	From what date did his salary commence and what salary has he drawn up to the present time, and what is his salary per annum?
4.	For what term was he engaged?
5.	Is his contract with the Crown or with the Department of Railways and Canals in writing or oral ?
6.	Has notice been given by or on behalf of the department to the officials or employees of the Intercolonial Railway of Mr. Russell's appointment? If so, at what date?
7.	Has Mr. Russell been employed or engaged since the 15th day of March, 1901? Has he been on duty or absent from duty during that period? If absent from duty, l'or what period has he been so absent, and on what ground has he been granted leave of absence?
8.	Is he still in the employ of the Crown or the Department of Railways and Canals? If so, has any arrangement been made whereby his engagement shall cease at an earlier date than was at first contemplated?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Blair) :: 
I.C.R-TRAIN SERVICE BETWEEN SUMMER-SIDE AND TIGNISH.
Mr. HACKETT asked :: 1.	Is it the intention of the government to run two trains each day on the Prince Edward Island Railway between Summerside .and Tignish, immediately cn the opening of navigation, when the summer boats commence carrying mails between Point du Chene, M B., and Summer-side. P.E.I.?
2.	Is the government aware that a second train each day is much required by all classes of people living between Summerside and Tignish?
3.	If the government will not grant a second train on this route, will they state the reasons why?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Blair) :: 1.	It is not the intention of the government to run two trains each day on the Prince Edward Island Railway between Summerside and Tignish, immediately on the opening of navigation, when the summer boats commence carrying the mails between Point du Chene, New Brunswick, and Summerside, Prince Edward Island. The second train will be put on, commencing May 20, about the same date as in recent years.
2.	Not aware that a second train is much required earlier than the date above mentioned.
3.	Because it is not considered that there is business to warrant the putting on of the summer trains on any part of the Prince Edward Island Railway before the usual time.


APPLICATION BY TORONTO TO RAILWAY COMMITTEE OF PRIVY COUNCIL.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. CLARKE-by Mr. Rosamond-asked :
1.	Has an application been made by the corporation of the city of Toronto to the Railway Committee of the Privy Council, asking that the railway companies be compelled to contribute to the cost of the protection of the level crossing at Dunn and Dowling avenues, in the city of Toronto?
2.	Has the application been ccyisidered by the Railway Committee of the Privy Council? If not, when is it likely to be heard?
3.	If the application has been considered by the committee, has any decision been reached ? If not, when is it likely that a decision will be reached and announced?
The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Blair) :: 1.	Application has been made by the corporation of the city of Toronto to the Railway Committee of the Privy Council, for an order directing that gates and watchmen be placed at the crossings, at rail level, at Dunn and Dowling avenues by the Grand Trunk Railway.

2.	Said application was heard by the said committee, on the 21st December last, 1909.
3.	Decision was reserved, and no order has yet been issued.



INDIAN LANDS OF COLERAINE.

Mr. MORIN asked :: 1.	Were the tenders for * The Indian lands of Coleraine,' which were to have been received at the Department of Indian Affairs, Ottawa, up to noon on the 15th instant, opened on that date?
2.	Has one of the tenders been accepted?
3.	In whose name was the tender which has been accepted, and what is the amount thereof?
4.	What are the names of the other parties who tendered, and the amounts of their several tenders ?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton) :: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes ; the highest tender was accepted.
3.	Louis Lavergne, $5,026.
4.	D. Champous & Bro., $3,501.07; James Reed, M.D., $1,654.



MR. AURELE PACAUD, WINDSOR, ONT.

James Clancy: Has Mr. Aurele Pacaud, of Windsor, Ont., made an application to the government for a position in H. M. Customs? If so, has any assurance been given to him that a position will be given him, or is it the intention of the government to give him a position?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS (Hon. Wm. Paterson).: It is not usual to furnish information in respect to applicants for government positions, where appointments have not been made.



STEAMER BLUE HILL.

Mr. BELL (Pictou) asked :: What subsidy does the steamer Blue Hill, running between Baddeck and Grand Narrows, receive ?
What is the tonnage of the boat, and what service is performed?


The MINISTER OF TRADE AND COMMERCE (Hon. Sir Richard Cartwright) :: The subsidy heretofore paid for the services of the steamer Blue Hill has been at the rate of $4,000 per annum ; the contract, however, expired with the close of navigation in January last.
The tonnage of the boat is 196 gross and 98 net.
The service performed has been from the opening of navigation in the month of March or April, as the case may be, until the close of navigation in the winter next succeeding, that is to say, until the ice would not permit of the running of the steamer over the route. The service between Baddeck, Iona and Grand Narrows has been two full round trips daily each way (Sundays excepted) until the end of December, and 109
from that date until the close of navigation one full round trip each day ; and during the same season of open navigation, one full round trip each fortnight to Big Pond and East Bay.



POSTMASTER AT GREENVALE.

Mr. BELL (Pictou) asked :: 1.	Who is postmaster of Greenvale, Pictou county, N.S., and what is his salary?
2.	From what point is mail carried to Greenvale?
3.	Who is the courier, and what is his contract payment for the service?


Hon. JAMES SUTHERLAND :: 1.	Daniel A. Stewart is postmaster of Greenvale, county Pictou. The salary of the postmaster of Greenvale is $12 a year.
2.	The mail for Greenvale is exchanged with the courier on the mail route between Blue Mountain and New Glasgow.
3.	John D. McIntosh is the contractor, his pay is $20 a year.
PAYMENT TO LE PROGRES, WINDSOR, ONT. *


James Clancy: What sums have been paid by the government, during the past two year3, to Le Progr&s, Windsor, Ont., for printing, advertising and subscrip-tic ns?
Have any claims been made by Le Progres for government advertisements published in its columns without authority of the government?
What is the amount of such claims?


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) :: During the fiscal year 1898-9 and 18991900, there was paid by the different departments to Le Progres :
For advertising	 $208 40
For subscriptions	 54 75
For printing	 None.



SOUTH AFRICAN WAR-PAY OF 'C' BATTERY

[Stage Direction]
Mr. CLARKE-by Mr. Brock-asked :
1.	Has the government ascertained, and if so, from what source, whether the pay of the men of ' C' Battery, Royal Canadian Artillery, during the time they served as a part of the Rhodesian Field Force came out of the Imperial or the Rhodesian treasury ?
2.	If so, from what treasury was the money paid? Have the Imperial authorities provided the amount, and is it a charge against the Imperial exchequer?
3.	If the government is not in possession of the foregoing information, does it intend to apply to the Imperial and Rhodesian authorities for a statement of the facts as to the payment of the men of the battery while serving with the Rhodesian Field Force?
The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. F. W. Borden).: The department is satisfied that the pay of the men of ' C ' Battery came out of the Imperial treasury, the War Office having authorized the special Rhodesian rates.

.COMMONS



B.C. FISHERIES-PROVINCIAL JURISDICTION

[Stage Direction]
Mr. MORRISON-by Mr. Mclsaae-asked :
1.	Is the government advised that the provincial government of British Columbia are contemplating exercising jurisdiction of the fisheries in that province?
2.	Has the government relinquished any of its jurisdiction over said fisheries which it has heretofore exercised?
The MINISTER OP MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. Sir Louis Davies) :: 1.	No. The government has not received any such advice.
2.	No, unless it may be with respect to oyster beds or other fisheries above low-[DOT] water mark.



OVERTURES OF BRITISH COLUMBIA GOVERNMENT.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. MORRISON-by Mr. Melsaac-asked :
What action, if any, has the government taken in respect of the overtures made by representatives of the British Columbia provincial government in January last?
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: The government of British Columbia has made several claims against the Federal government. Some of these claims have been practically settled, though no official step has yet been taken upon them. The others are still pending.
PAY OF MEN OF ' C * BATTERY.
Mr. CLARKE-by Mr. Mclsaac-asked :
1.	Did the men of ' C ' Battery, Royal Canadian Artillery, who served In South Africa, receive any pay from the Canadian government from the 21st March, 1900, the day the battery reached Cape Town, until April 14th, 1900, when the Rhodesian bounty or pay commenced ?
2.	Did the men of the battery receive only Imperial pay between the dates above mentioned? If so, why have they not received Canadian pay for the period named?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. F. W. Borden) :: 1.	About fifty non-commissioned officers and men have received this pay.
2.	Yes, the remainder have received Imperial pay only. The department is awaiting returns from the officer who commanded ' C ' Battery, as to the rates of pay the men drew from the Imperial government, and what rank they held during the period mentioned. As soon as this return is received, the pay will be computed and issued.



C.P.R.-INTERPRETATION OF EXEMPTION CLAUSE.

Mr. RICHARDSON (Lisgar) asked :: In view of the recent declaration of parliament in favour of securing a judicial interpretation of the clause in the Canadian Pacific Railway charter relating to the exemption from taxation of the company's land grant, will the government,. in submitting the case, endeavour to establish the plea that the exemption contem-Mr. BORDEN (King's).
plated in the clause began with the ratification of the contract?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: The government will endeavour to establish the most favourable view of the contracts in the interest of the ratepayers of the North-west, and will be guided by its legal advisers as to the best method of advancing that object.



SALARY OF SENIOR CIRCUIT JUDGE.


The SOLICITOR GENERAL (Hon. Chas. Fitzpatrick) moved :: That, to-morrow, the House will resolve itself into committee to conslde the following proposed resolution :-
That it is expedient to provide that the salary of the senior judge of the Circuit Court of the district of Montreal shall be $3,600 per annum.


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: Mr. Speaker, I beg to say that I have the Governor General's assent to this resolution, as well as to the following one.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

The SOLICITOR GENERAL (Hon. Chas. Fitzpatrick) moved :: That, to-morrow, the House will resolve itself into committee to consider the following proposed resolution :-
That it is expedient to amend the Act respecting the judges of provincial courts and to provide as follows :-
1.	That the salary of the chief justice of the Supreme Court of the North-west Territories shall be $5,000, and of the four puisnS judges of the said court each $4,000 per annum.
2.	That the salary of an additional judge of the Territorial Court of the Yukon territory shall be $5,000 per annum.
3.	That the salaries of the seventeen puisne judges of the Superior Court of Quebec, whose residences are fixed at Montreal or Quebec (including the judge to whom the district of Terrebonne is assigned), shall be each $5,000 per annum.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
Harbours and rivers, Prince Edward Island, $42,500.
['We shall probably take up the Election Bill in the afternoon, if found convenient. Following that, we shall proceed with the estimates of the Minister of Railways.']
Robert Laird Borden: I would like to ask the minister a question which, strictly speaking, should have been asked in connection with the Nova Scotia items ; that is, the cost of the shed and the wharf at Salmon River.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. J. I. Tarte).: That shed has cost about $300.


Robert Laird Borden: Would the hon. gentleman at some future time ask his deputy to let me know precisely the. cost of that work at Salmon River ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: With pleasure.


Adam Carr Bell: Is the minister prepared to make any provision for the protection and preservation of the wharfs at Pictou Island ? I have received information that they require some attention this year in order to prevent their destruction.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I will look carefully into the question. My attention has been called to it by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bell, Pictou), and by other gentlemen also. When the supplementary estimates come, I will be in a position to give a more definite answer.
Cascumpec Harbour-Closing opening through beach, $2,000.


Edward Hackett: What amount of money was expended for this same purpose last year? Was it let by contract or days' work, and is it the intention of the minister to carry it out by day's work this year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The total estimated cost is $3,500. Last year $1,500 was spent, and $2,000 is asked this year to complete the work.


Edward Hackett: Some years ago a large amount of money was expended for blasting rock at the entrance of Cascumpec harbour, and it was believed that by the blasting of this rock the outflow of water from the harbour would not be impeded. Is it the intention of the minister to continue the work of blasting the rock there, which was found to be very beneficial. If that work had been continued this opening would not have been made through the sand-hills at all.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have no information as to the blasting of that rock. I will take a note of what the hon. gentleman says, and I will ask Mr. Egan to inquire into it.


James Clancy: What is the nature of that work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We have a resident engineer who has been employed for twelve or fifteen years, and it is on his report that we carrv out the work. This is to close a gap in the beach.


Edward Hackett: I believe that money should be expended on this work, and so far the appropriation is perfectly correct. Last year $1,400 was expended, and it was simply thrown away there by day's labour. There was no competition In connection with the work. There should have been a contract. The early freshets of the spring carried the work that was done out to sea. There was no permanent work done there.
I approve of the expenditure of this money, but the minister should see that it is not placed in the hands of political friends and favourites. The work should be put up to
109*
competition, and the money expended properly and in the interests of the people.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The work has been successfully carried out, and I will carry it on in the same way as formerly.
Public Works-Hurd's Point-Repairs to pier, $350.


Mr. LEFURGEY.: I should like to know what this amount is to be used for.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is called for by Mr. Egan, the resident engineer, and the acting .chief engineer, for the completion of repairs.
Miminegash breakwater, &c., $1,500.


Edward Hackett: What is this money intended for ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is required by Mr. Egan and the acting chief engineer for levelling and close piling the ends and sides of the breakwater, replacing a portion, and effecting some general repairs.


Edward Hackett: Yes, I remember that a year or two ago a contract was let for the extension of the Miminegash breakwater, and when the contract was completed the outer end of the breakwater was found to be about two feet under water, and it is necessary now to raise and bring it up to the proper level. The expenditure of this money is very necessary. Miminegash is an important harbour of refuge on the west side of Prince Edward Island, and it is necessary to have money spent there to improve the harbour. The work for which this money is asked should have been carried out last year. The sum of $1,200 was expended last year, and the minister will remember very well how it was expended- in building a brush fence over the sand hills for the purpose of giving employment to his followers previous to the election ; and when the first storm of the fall came, nearlv the whole of that brush fence was carried away. If the minister is going to do some close piling and raise the end of the pier, there would be no difficulty in making a plan of the work ; and I trust that he will not place it in the hands of his followers, but put it up to tender so that all classes will have an opportunity of competing for the work.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is a small sum which is asked to complete the work. The whole community will benefit by that work. My hon. friend asks me to put it up to tender. The House will not share his view. I do not object to ask for tenders for large works, but small works such as this cannot be successfully done by contract. We would spend more money in publishing advertisements for tenders than we would in carrving out tbii work.


Edward Hackett: This is not for repairs ; it is to complete a new work. The hon. gentleman knows wrhat that new' work is and what is required to be done, and I am sure the people would willingly pay the cost of advertising in order to have it put up to competition, so that all contractors m Canada will have an opportunity of competing for it, instead of the money being paid to a few favourites of the government.
* Mr. CLANCY. My bon. friend from Prince (Mr. Hackett) has made the statement that the money expended last year on this work w-as frittered away among favourites of the government. This is a small sum, and I do not imagine that the committee is at all inclined to criticise the expenditure if it is necessary ; but the minister has made no reply to that statement. We have come to a time when I think the committee may well demand of the 'lion, gentleman that he draw the line somewhere between contract work and day's labour.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I certainly do not intend to ask for tenders in this case. Last year we spent $1,819.1(5 In effecting repairs on the northern breakwater and constructing protection works. This vote is practically for a continuation of the work, and I intend to carry it out by day's labour, because I feel, as I have long felt, that w'orks of small importance are better and more economically done by day s labour than by contract. You buy your own material, and you pay the men just w'hat the contractor pays them. The work last year was successfully carried out. I may say that I have kept the same old Conservative engineer who was there when I took office.


James Clancy: Why did you not dismiss him ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am scarified more than if I had done so. and had appointed a Liberal. I have kept him because he is doing the work well. I am sure that he does not exclude every Conservative on the island, and surely my hon. friend will not insist that I ask for tenders. The work is a very useful one, and I do not see why we should discuss it any more.


Edward Hackett: I think that the appropriation for Miminegash properly expended will be of great advantage, and I am finding no fault with the minister for the amount placed in the estimates. But when he speaks about the resident engineer being a Conservative, I know nothing about that, and can tell him that he has nothing to do with the employing of the men. He simply makes his plans and specifications, which are placed in the hands of a follower of the government, who sees that no Conservatives can get a day's work on those public works.
There is another work not mentioned in the estimates, but of great importance, required at a place about ten miles distant from Miminegash. It is a place called Skinner's Pond. Around the coast we have many of these ponds, separated from the gulf by a narrow belt of sand. They can be made of great utility to the fishermen, if proper works are done to utilize the waters in those ponds. The people of Skinner's Pond, who are mostly fishermen, desire to have some work done there. I asked a short time ago what amount had been expended, and was told that $1,462 had been spent there last year. 1 asked what engineer had reported and was told that Mr. Egan had reported on the 29th of September, 1898. I asked when the work had begun and was told on the 30th of September, 1900, exactly two years after the engineer had reported and one month and seven days before the elections. I asked the minister whether he had an appropriation for that work, and he said no, that the money had been paid out of special appropriations for the repairs of harbours and piers in Prince Edward Island. Forty men were put to work at Skinner's Pond, thirty-seven days before the elections, and were kept at work for some days afterwards. That work was done when it was required very much, not for the needs of the people, but for the purpose of electing a supporter of the government. Why did the hon. gentleman sleep two years over the matter ? When he had his report on the 29th of September, 189S, why did he wait until the 30th of September, 1900 1 He slept two years, but on the 29tli of September, 1900 he had a vision in which he was told that if he did not begin the work then, his candidate would be defeated and wiped out. He then expended $1,400, but I see nothing in the estimates to continue the work. It is a work of great magnitude. The hon. gentleman began by digging a channel through the sand bank between the pond and the gulf, and that work must be continued. There is no natural outlet there at all, and he should in the supple-mentaries provide $5,000 at least to complete the digging of this channel as well as erect a pier at the outer end, in order that the outflowing or inflowing waters may concentrate in the channel.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I cannot keep in mind all the reports from the resident engineers, but I am advised that to carry out that work would cost about $20,000. That is a large amount. My hon. friend is a most economical man in public matters generally, but when his own locality is concerned he wants to spend a large amount of money. I am a careful man and am prepared to spend the money when I get full information, but until then I stay my hand. I shall take advantage of all the information which my hon. friend offers, for I always receive his opinion with a great deal of consideration. Supposing we have spent some money there, that ex-

penditure has been useful. I deeply sympathize with the fishermen and will do everything I can to help them.


Hon. Mr. HAGGART.: I want to give my hon. friend full credit for what he is doing in improving the harbours in the islands. He has done a great deal for us, but if this work is to cost $20,000, why does the hon. gentleman, just prior to the election, throw away $1,500 on it ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We have done some work which is useful [DOT]and are not bound to spend everything asked for. Later on, if we find it is useful to spend more money, we will do so.


James Clancy: Useful for what ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: This is a pond, in which there was an opening into the sea not large enough to enable fishing boats to come in. Last year my hon. friend enlarged that channel, and that enlargement has been a great advantage as the hon. member admits. Before I left Prince Edward Island, I was waited on by a deputation of gentlemen from both sides of politics, who asked me to thank the Minister of Public Works for what he had done. They said it was a great boon as far as it went, but that a great deal more ought to be done and could be done by making a harbour there. I said that was a big business, involving a lot of money. I asked how much it would cost, and they could not tell exactly, and I promised that when I came to Ottawa, I would visit the Department of Public Works and look into the matter. I found that the report of the engineer showed that to carry out the new work required would cost $20,-
000.	I think that the Minister of Public Work did very well, as far as he went, and did a great deal better to stay his hand and give consideration to this very large expenditure. I did not feel my way clear to take grants from other parts of the island and spend $20,000 trying to make a harbour just at this place. My hon.'friend (Hon. Mr. Tarte) said he would consider the matter, and that is a fair answer to give.
New London-Repairs to breakwater, &c. $3,600.


James Clancy: Is that under contract or by day's labour ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We have called for tenders. We spent $248 there last year.
Public Works-Chargeable to Income-Harbours and Rivers, P.E.I.-Rustico (south)-Repairs to pier, $1,500.


James Clancy: Is this to complete the work of repair ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: If my hon. friend (Hon. Mr. Tarte) will permit me, I might explain that Rustico pier is one of the piers on the north
side of the island concerning which there has been more or less difficulty for many years back. Last year, I visited the place, and the neighbours gathered round and showed me what was required to be done there. The water rushing out of Rustico harbour goes through a circuitous channel, and the difficulty is, with the breakwater to keep the harbour from filling up. There are two channels in Rustico harbour. And the present idea, in which the local resident engineer concurs, is that there should be an ' L' built on the existing breakwater and stop the water to the westward and send the volume of water out through the main channel. It is for this work that the vote is asked. This is one of the largest fishing stations on the north side of Prince Edward Island.


James Clancy: Will $1,500 finish the work ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.
Public Works-Chargeable to Income-Harbours and Rivers, P.E.I.-Souris, Knight's Point -Strengthening breakwater, $5,000.


Edward Hackett: What is this ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Hackett) knows the Souris breakwater. It has been there for twenty-five years. It forms a harbour of refuge not only for the colonial but for the American fishermen, and it is essential that it should be kept in thorough repair. To this end, it must be strengthened every year. As the hon. gentleman knows, last year one of the most devastating storms ever known in the maritime provinces struck our coast, and this pier received shaking and damage. I have seen as many as from fifty to sixty colonial and American fishing vessels lying under the shelter of the breakwater. It would be nothing less than a public crime for any Minister of Public Works to allow this work to go down or get out of repair. It is the most important breakwater, by long odds, in Prince Edward Island, and it must be retained in thorough repair, or the fishermen will have no harbour of refuge there at all.


Robert Laird Borden: How much was spent there last year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The amount was $1,125.
. Mr. HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.) This vote is for rip-rapping the seaward side of the breakwater with hard stone from Nova Scotia. There is no hard stone found in the island. Last year, $13,000 was voted, and a contract was let. But it was late in the season and the contractor was unable to do the work. He will not be able to do very much of the work before the 30tli June this year, and that is the reason of this

vote. While X am on my feet, I would like to say that I think the hon. member for West Prince (Mr. Hackett) gave a wrong impression to the House when speaking a few moments ago with reference to Skinner's Pond, he said that the resident engineer reported in 1898 upon the necessity of that work and that it was not until last year that it was commenced. Now, the engineer reports on all the works or contemplated works on the island each year, hut, of course, all the works cannot be taken up in one year

they must take their turn, the more necessary works first, and the others later. Sometimes it is three or four years after a report is sent in before a work can be commenced. I think the hon. member for West Prince wished to give the impression that this work at Prog Pond was purposely kept back. I do not think this was correct-it is the ordinary state of affairs that it is some time after the report is made before the work can be commenced.


Edward Hackett: I hope the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hughes, King's, P.E.I.) does not question the accuracy of my statement.
Mr. HGUGHES (King's, P.E.I.) I do not question it ; at the same time, the impression conveyed to the House might be incorrect. If I were a stranger and knew nothing about the facts, I would suppose that the work had been purposely kept back till the eve of the election. Such was not the case, because some works must be kept back after the year in which the engineer reports upon them. Some are being held over this year.


Robert Laird Borden: I understand from the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hughes, King's, P.E.I.) that the contract was let just on the eve of the election. Perhaps the hon. Minister of Public Works could give us the exact date.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I think the contract was awarded late. The House sat until August, and we could not take up all the work at once. Besides, I was away; but when I came back. I hurried the work as much as I could, and my hon. friend (Hon. Sir Louis Davies) helped me.


The MINISTER OP MARINE AND FISHERIES.: In any case, the work was let by tender.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, it was by tender. At- the same time, it was not long before the election.


Robert Laird Borden: Could the hon. gentleman give us the exact date ?


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: I think it was the 2nd of November.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: Oh, we were quite sure to carry the electiou -it made no difference.
Mr. HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.)


Robert Laird Borden: At what time was the work commenced ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The work was started immediately.
Mr. HUGHES (King's. P.E.I.) The work has not been commenced yet.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, we have spent there $1,100.
Mr. HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.) That was for carpenter work.


Robert Laird Borden: We would like to get the minister and the hon. member (Mr. Hughes, King's, P.E.I.) into harmony if we could. One says the work was commenced immediately, the other says it has not been commenced yet.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: What the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hughes, King's, P.E.I.) said was that the stonework had not been started, but the carpenter work-the repairs had been begun.


Robert Laird Borden: At what time ?


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: Immediately, I suppose.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The expenditure took place during the summer.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: Instructions were given on the 9th of August to go on with the carpenter work. That was before the elections were even decided upon.


Robert Laird Borden: But at what date was this work commenced ?


The MINISTER OP MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Perhaps my hon. friend (Hon. Mr. Tarte) would allow me to explain. The work for which this money has been voted has not been commenced. Tenders were called for and the contract let at the beginning of last November. It is to riprap the outside of the pier with Nova Scotia stone. That will be done this summer. There was carpenter work to be done in repairing the woodwork on the breakwater, and that was done, but not a dollar was spent on the rip-rap.


Robert Laird Borden: This is getting into a most dreadful state of confusion. I understand less about it, the more the Minister of Marine and Fisheries explains it. There was a sum of $13,000 in the estimates last year. Now, either the whole or part or none of that was expended.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There was $1,100 out of that spent for carpenter work. The balance is for stonework which has not yet been carried out.


Robert Laird Borden: I think the hon. Minister of Public Works is quite right about it. Now, what we want to ascertain is wdien that work involving the expenditure

of $1,100 last year was commenced, and over what period the contract extended.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The acting chief engineer informs me that instructions were given in the month of August-as to the exact date when the work was started, I am not prepared to say. But, if the hon. gentleman (Mr. Borden, Halifax) desires it, I can get the date.


Robert Laird Borden: Perhaps the
hon. gentleman will give us the exact date later on.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: With pleasure.


Robert Laird Borden: The date ,at
which the advertisements were sent out calling for tenders.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They were certainly sent out in the month of October, because the contract was awarded on the 2nd of November.


Robert Laird Borden: Did tlje advertisements specify the work which has been referred to by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I do not know.


Robert Laird Borden: That is very mysterious.


Tbie MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: There is nothing mysterious about it. Tenders were called for repairs of the stone work on the outside of the pier, called during the summer, and the contract was awarded on the 2nd of November to the lowest tenderer. The carpenter work was done during the summer, but it had nothing to do with this.


Robert Laird Borden: It had something to do with this pier, had it not 7


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: I want to ascertain whether the advertisement sent out included this work involving an expenditure of some $1,100.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: No.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It did not cover that part of the work. That was done by day's labour, and then tenders were asked for to cover the stone work.


Robert Laird Borden: At that time the department must have understood the exact position of the carpenter work.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The carpenter work that has been done, the chief engineer tells me, was simply repairs of the piers. There was no new work at all about it.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It was an ordinary expenditure of money for ordinary repairs.


Robert Laird Borden: The whole of this work is repairs, is it not 7


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Rip-rapping the outside pier with stone.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend perhaps is not quite conversant with that kind of work. Suppose there is a pier exposed to the big waves of the sea, that pier is formed of carpenter work, not only there but elsewhere. Now, we repair the cribwork that has been injured, but to strengthen the pier it has been found necessary by the engineers to riprap the work, in other words, to place about the cribwork big stones, just as we do elsewhere, as we are doing now at Cape Tormentine. That is the kind of work for which these tenders for stone have been called.


Robert Laird Borden: I understand what rip-rapping is, I have been over this work possibly a good many times, but I never could understand why a part of the work, such as this expenditure of $1,100 represents, was not included in the general tender.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That could not be, because it was simply a repair. That part of the work was all timber, cribwork, within which the stone had to be placed. Not the same thing at all.


Robert Laird Borden: No, it is not the same thing, but it is all on the same pier, and possibly a separate tender might have been invited. I cannot understand why it is that part is done by day's work and part by tender. I suppose there must have been some good reason for it.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: If the hon. gentleman was Minister of Public Works-and for his own sake I do not wish him to be-he would know that repairs can always be better carried out by day's labour than by tender. When you begin to repair a work you never know how much is to be done.


James Clancy: I see last year a vote was taken for $13,000, of which $1,100 has been spent, and the hon. gentleman asks now for $5,000. Does he propose to abandon the work that was then in contemplation, or why does he now only ask for $5,000 7 That vote was taken on the eve of a general election, for $13,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Let me call the hon. gentleman's attention to the nature of the vote. We are asking for this $5,000 to rip-rap the work, we do not ask it for the same work for which we took a vote last year.


Edward Hackett: Is the gentleman who has the contract for the rip-rap work the same man who did the carpenter work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No.


Edward Hackett: What is the name of the man who did the carpenter work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have not his name just now, hut I will give it to my hon. friend.


Edward Hackett: Is it not a fact that the money for this so-called carpenter work went to the late contractor as extras just before the election ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I will give the name of the man who did the carpenter work. My officers have taken a note of it, there is no secret about it.


Edward Hackett: Was not the name John T. Brennan ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I will give the name with pleasure.
Summerside Harbour-Breakwater, $15,000.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: This appropriation for the Summerside breakwater has been in the estimates for the last four years, but there is no breakwater yet. The matter has been used during several elections for the purpose of getting votes ; but the needs of the people, the shippers at Summerside, have apparently been a secondary matter in the mind of the Minister of Public Works. On February 13, I asked a question of the minister, and found that a contract had been let to McDonald & Moffat for $55,900. The contract was let on May 25, 1900, and the work was to he commenced at once, and to be finished on the 25th of November, 1901. The reply was that nothing had been done. Now, we have nearly entered into another year since the contract was let, and I would like to know whether the contractors intend to go on with this contract. If they do not, and if the work is necessary, as the engineers have reported, I would like to know the reason of the delay. I trust that this important work will be pushed forward at once, as it is very essential to our winter communication, and I also hope the minister will favourably consider the building of a pier at Gordon's Point, about which I asked a question some days ago.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That Summerside work has created a good deal of attention in the department. Ready as we were to do the right thing by Summer-side, we were frightened by the vast amount of money that the plans called for. I visited the place myself a few years ago with the present acting chief engineer. If I remember right, the first plans would have entailed an expenditure of $125,000. We Mr. TARTE.
thought that was too large a sum of money to ask for, and we made new plans which while being sufficient will involve less money. Tenders were asked for, and the present contractors are Messrs. McDonald & Moffat, who took the contract for $55,900. They are now proceeding with the work.
I grant there has been a little delay, but I am glad to inform the hon. gentleman that the two contractors have set to work, and we expect the work will, be carried on speedily and to a successful conclusion.
Tignish-To complete repairs and extension of breakwater, $500.


Edward Hackett: What does this exten-si9n consist of ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This vote of $500 is required to complete the construction of the addition to the outer block, 60 feet by 40 feet, at the outer end of the northern breakwater in Tignish harbour. The resident engineer is asking for that amount to do the work which I have just described.
West Point-Extension of pier, $2,000.


Edward Hackett: What depth of water will you have when this work is completed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have not the information at hand, but my ! officers are taking a note of it and will give it to my hon. friend (Mr. Hackett) to-morrow morning.


James Clancy: Is that work being done under contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Edward Hackett: There is another work that I would like to call to the attention of the hon. minister, and that is at Brae, which is about ten miles from West Point. I do not see any appropriation in the estimates for the Brae work. That work has been going on for many years and to make it available you will have to continue it still further until you get beyond the sand bank on the'side of the channel. I trust the hon. minister will see his way to having an amount placed in the supplementary estimates to provide for the further prosecution of the work at Brae.
The* MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS. Our attention has been called to that work in the same way that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hackett) now calls our attention to it. I cannot promise anything, but. I repeat that our attention has been called successively to that work.
Wood Island (south)-Extension of breakwater, $700.
The, MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS. Under contract and this is to complete the work.

New Brunswick-Back Bay-Towards extension of wharf, $4,900.


James Clancy: What is the nature of that work ?	,


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Tenders have been asked, but the contract is not yet awarded. It will be awarded to the lowest tenderer, of course.


Mr. GANONG.: What has been done with the $800 appropriated last year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We did not spend any money last year, so my officers tell me.


Gilbert White Ganong: What depth of water will you have at low water at the end of the pier ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The present pier is 150 feet long and 20 feet wide. It Is proposed to lengthen it by 56 feet, and to add a block at the outer end which will reach a depth of eight feet at low water and thirty-two feet at high water.


Gilbert White Ganong: Will this work be let by tender 1


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, tenders are asked for now.


Gilbert White Ganong: The work is very credit able to the government, I must say.


James Clancy: Does this sum which is asked for complete the work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There will be $2,000 in the supplementary estimates. This will not cover the whole cost of the work. We are not sure what the amount of the tender will be and it may be necessary to have $2,000 additional.


James Clancy: Then, I understand the hon. gentleman to say that the sum he is going to ask for later in the supplementary estimates, is intended to cover the whole expenditure on that work '!


The MINISTER GF PUBLIC WORKS.: Quite so.
Bay du Vin-To complete extension of wharf, $2,750.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: By contract.
Burnt Church-Wharf, $3,900.
The; MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS. By contract also.
Campobello (Wilson's Beach)-Repairs to breakwater, $6,000.


Gilbert White Ganong: Has this work been let by tender ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We asked for tenders and we did not get any. Public tenders were asked for in the newspapers in the usual way and we did
not receive any. Then, we made up our minds to proceed by day's labour.


Gilbert White Ganong: The reason probably is that they were fooled down there about this matter. They did not assume for a moment that the government meant to do the work and men would not necessarily fool their time away with it. To allow work like this, which will run into thousands of dollars, in a location like Campobello, to be let by day's work is an outrage on the country. There is a great rise and fall of tide at this point. I believe the maximum of the tide is 28 or 30 feet, and to attempt to put green hands at work to build a pier of this character is a waste of public money. This is a desirable work, a work that should have been prosecuted by the late government, perhaps, to a greater extent than it was. But, this government have allowed three, four, or five years to elapse when they knew from their engineer's reports that it was necessary to make repairs to this work and these reports will show that their neglect to make these repairs will entail an expenditure of $2,000 or $3,000 additional. To-day we have the spectacle in that county of a work that will cost from $15,000 to $25,000, if it is completed as it should be, let by day's labour to men who know nothing whatever about wharf building.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am always surprised when I hear a gentleman who is in business speaking about an outrage in a case like this. One would imagine that no important work in this country is carried on by day's labour. Look at the work that is going on in the port of Montreal where a $3,000,000 undertaking is being carried on in the most successful way by day's labour. This is not the only part of the country in which day's labour has been adopted.' Railway and other important companies carry on work by day's labour. In this case I do not feel that I am guilty of any outrage. I asked for tenders. Tenders were not received. Was it my duty to carry out the work for which parliament had voted money or not ? I was instructed to carry out this work, I have canned it out and the hon. gentleman is not pleased. I did not receive tenders, because, he says the people thought we were not serious. Well, that is a very poor excuse. The work has been successfully carried on under the direction of a very able man-Mr. Shewan. He is not always agreeable to hon. gentlemen opposite.' far from it. Here is another case in which I left in his position a man who had been appointed by our opponents. He lias the supervision of this work. They have been warned, they have been notified, and if they do not carry out their work as they should do they will suffer. I did not receive any tenders and so I gave it by day's work. My hon. friend (Mr.. Ganong) is very hard to please.


Gilbert White Ganong: Was it Mr. She wan who looked after that work ? No ; it was a local heeler of the Liberal party, who was instructed to look after that.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Mr. Shewan has supervision of the whole work. Of course, I suppose the foreman was one of our political friends. My hon. friend (Mr. Ganong) is enough of a sound business man to admit that when he is in office he will not select his foremen from this side of the House if he can find good men on his side. There are plenty of good foremen on the other side of the House and he can get them. When my friends opposite are in office I will not cry if they employ their own friends. That is fair dealing.


James Clancy: My hon. friend (Mr. Ganong) characterized this in a very mild term when he said it was an outrage. Here is a work costing $25,000, and the object of the minister in giving it out by days' labour is clearly to take the public money to bribe people with it. He will give no chance to the workmen of this country who do not belong to his political stripe. If he gave the work by tender the contractors would employ men irrespective of politics.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I asked for tenders and received none, and what am I to do ?


James Clancy: You should do as any business man or any man of common sense would do ; you should, as custodian of the public money, ask for tenders again, and I venture to say that the minister could get them. The hon. gentleman says that he had instructions to do that work. Who did he get these instructions from ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: From this very parliament.


James Clancy: And the minister had instructions from parliament to carry on the work to which my friend from West Prince referred, but he did not do it until two years afterwards. It is time that the minister (Hon. Mr. Tarte) should cease putting up Conservatives, whether they are local engineers or not, as buffers, between him and his department. The hon. gentleman is too much in the habit of doing that.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No.


James Clancy: The Minister of Public Works tells us that this man is a Conservative and a good officer. If he is a man of sense, he knows that his head would fall in the basket in twenty-four hours if he interfered with the political friends of the minister controlling the work, or allowed any but political friends of the minister to work at it. I know of no greater public scandal in Canada to-day than that a minister of the Crown should corruptly-I am using a Mr. TARTE.
mild term when I say it-corruptly take the money of the people to do this by days' work, his only object being to help his political friends. I deny that a public work can be carried out in a clean and successful manner under such circumstances. The minister (Hon. Mr. Tarte) sets out the plea that there is a resident engineer who is a good Conservative and who has been troublesome to his party, but I venture to say that he is not troublesome to his party now. It is the duty of the minister, before he gets any more estimates, to give a pledge, which I presume he will keep, that all works of that magnitude should be let by tender and that he should cease presenting that old excuse which is now so unsavory as to be almost unpresentable longer, namely, that lie does this for the purpose of helping the workingman. There is no Conservative in this House who would pretend to say that the party in power has not the right to serve its own political friends, but, the Minister of Public Works has gone beyond that. He has taken the work away from public competition and he has given it out by days' labour in order to exclude every workingman who is not a Liberal. No minister of the Crown is justified in doing that. I admit frankly that there are cases where you cannot do a work by tender and contract, but a minister ought to be scrupulously careful in this, and if he errs at all, it should be on the side of tender and contract. It may be true, as the minister says, that works have been successfully carried out by days' labour, but if so, it is an accident. The principle is unsound. No great railway corporation will let work by days' labour Unless it is done under their own men. There is no safe way of guarding the public treasury except by the rule of contract and tender. It is a rule that is contended for with great energy and vigour and ability by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Hon. Sir Richard Cartwright) in days past. How does he feel to-day, sitting silently beside the Minister of Public Works, who goes on regardless of the principle of tender and contract, and who is dribbling out the public funds of this country under the pretense of giving work to the labouring men ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Clancy) is at times reasonable, but at other times party spirit makes him take the wrong side of things. I have never known a case which is more simple than this one. I asked for tenders, I did not get any tenders, I started the work. I was pressed to carry out the work, the materials are there and the work is started. Am I not to go on with it ? If I had wished to commit that abominable outrage over which the hon. gentleman grows eloquent, I would not have asked for tenders ; but I asked for tenders, and tenders did not come. I then proceeded to do the

work by day labour. I take exception, not in a party spirit, but in a general way, to the doctrine laid down by the hon. gentleman.


James Clancy: The hon. gentleman will pardon me. It was laid down by the hon. gentleman's own friends, and contended for by them for years and years, and I venture to say that if they were on this side ot the House, they would contend for it to-day.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I invite the hon. gentleman to allow me to settle my case with my friends.


James Clancy: You must settle it with mine too.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am prepared to settle it with the hon. gentleman now ; but, he will let me settle my difficulties with this side of the House. No man of sound business experience will say that work cannot be successfully carried out by day labour. What does the contractor do, after all ? He gets a contract from my department or any other, and he engages day labour for the work. Why, then, should not the officers of a well-conducted department be able to carry out the work just as well as the foreman of the contractor ? I cannot understand the doctrine that is laid down here. It simply means that no minister can find good foremen or good officers. There is no sense in that. I feel as able to find good foremen as Mr. Davis or Mr. Onderdonk, or any other contractor in the world. I have no objection to asking for tenders when the public interest requires it. It gives me a great deal less trouble. When a contract is awarded, I appoint an inspector of tne works, and I am through with it-that is, when the contractor is a good man. But when the contractor is an incapable man, and a man who has no means, I am not sure at all. My experience since I have been in office has convinced me that the system of the lowest tenderer, as it is practised in this country is a dangerous one. If we did what is done in France, in England, and in Germany- asked for tenders from a list of selected ' competent men-I would go in every time for the lowest tender ; but, when an 'incompetent man, a man who has no means, and who does not know his business, gets a contract by public tender, he puts you in deep water more than you may suppose. Such contractors do not pay their men. they do not pay for what they buy, they do not go on promptly and rapidly with the work. Of course, there are good contractors, but there are also a lot of contractors who tender low because they expect that if they get the contract something will turn up. Coming back to this work, I say I have done my duty. My hon. friend is not right or fair when he speaks of outrages. I have never committed any outrages to my knowledge. As a minister, I may have made mistakes ; but I have tried to be fair. My hon. friend reproaches me by saying that I have kept in the different provinces officers who were appointed under the late administration. I do not try to shield myself behind them. I only mention them to prove that I have not acted unfairly. It would have been easy for me to cut off the heads of some of these officers, because they are only temporary employees ; but, I keep them because I believe that when I have a good servant it is my duty to keep him. I know that my view is not shared Dy all my political friends ; it is not shared by my hon. friends opposite either; but that is my personal view. I give my patronage to my political friends first; it is my duty to do that; but, so far as the heads of branches are concerned, I have kept those who have done their duty, even when they have not been appointed by order in council. I believe I have acted fairly, and I do not think I deserve the reproaches too often levelled against me on that account. I would rather, perhaps, deserve reproaches from this side of the House. If I acted improperly in mentioning names, I will not mention them again. I am responsible for everything I do.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I am somewhat surprised at the criticism of the hon. member for Charlotte (Mr. Ganong) with regard to this work.


Gilbert White Ganong: No one is opposed to the work.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: No, but when the minister states that he advertised for Iiublic tenders and did not receive any, the hon. gentleman knows that he did what every good business man would have done -put in charge of the work an officer of the department in whom he had confidence, and left him to carry it out. I agree with the minister, that on general principles it is better in all possible cases to advertise for public tenders; but, everybody with any experience of business knows that when men without experience and without capital get contracts because their tenders are the lowest, the work is generally delayed, is poorly done and very unsatisfactorily done, and in the end costs the country a great deal more money. We have had instances of that at different times in previous sessions. It is not true that railway companies, and other business companies and private individuals having work to do, adopt the rule of letting it out by tender. On the contrary, it is quite a common thing, under the changed conditions, where we have trades unions and fixed rates of wages, to provide competent engineers and foremen, and do the work by day's labour. In this very municipality works involving ten times the amount of this work have been done by day's labour, and done with satisfaction. I take the opposite view to my hon. friends

opposite in tliis matter. I have looked into several small works, and I find that under the system of letting by tender, by the time you pay the wages of the engineer, the foremen and overseers, you find that a great deal of money is spent in that way. If a work is let by contract, even if it is a small work, the minister has to put some one in charge of it; and for that reason a great deal of public money is spent in wages of inspectors or overseers. I do not believe that the hon. gentleman will say that none but men who voted Liberal were employed. I do not believe that any such statement is correct, or that the engineer in charge had any such instruction.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I never did that in my life.


Gilbert White Ganong: The party heeler who had charge of the work has done it.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I am prepared to deny the statement. Neither the Minister of Public Works-or any other officer in the department gave the engineer or party heelers any such instructions. A few days ago we had a similar statement made concerning another public work and made by a gentleman also living in the locality. But I have here a statement made by the contractor. Mr. Green, under his signature, giving such statements unqualified denial.


David Henderson: Is the hon. gentleman going to lay the letter on the Table ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes, if my hon. friend wishes it. I wish to read this statement as showing how misleading and unfounded these charges are. I am sure that no member of the House is so unfair as to try and make some thing appear to exist which has no existence in reality. Notwithstanding our party feeling, surely we want these works to go on and the money to be expended to the best advantage ; and, if, instead of these carping and unfounded criticisms, hon. gentlemen would offer suggestions, the Minister pf Public Works would be only too happy to take advantage of any suggestions by which improvements in the works could be effected.


Gilbert White Ganong: Cross the House and we will tell you how.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: From the spirit the hon. gentleman exhibits, I do not think he would be very competent to be placed in the position of Minister of Public Works. I shall not read the whole of this letter of Mr. Green, but only a part of it. Mr. Green says :
Mr. Ingram is reported to have made the following statement : A London man was given the sub-contract for the brickwork. I wish to give this the most unqualified denial.


James Clancy: Is the hon. gentleman denying what an hon. member said ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes, and this denial is signed by the contractor himself.


James Clancy: I submit, Mr. Chairman, that the hon. gentleman is not in order. He has no right to do so.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I do not know of any rule that will prevent me from submitting facts in contradiction of a statement made in this House.


James Clancy: The hon. gentleman has no right to read any document from any outsider denying any statement made by a member in this House.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I presume that the hon. member for Elgin (Mr. Ingram) made the statement from information he received, and would be glad to know the truth. If he were here, I do not believe that he would raise the point of order. The charge was made that none but supporters of the government are employed on these works. How is the House to know the truth of such charges if we are not to be allowed to give the statements of the only people who have personal knowledge. I do not think I am out of order.


Thomas Barnard Flint: The hon. gentleman is not out of order.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Mr. Green goes on to say :
He is also reported to have stated : ' It was current report in St. Thomas that Mr. Green could not get the contract until he gave a pledge that the brickwork would be given to a prominent London Liberal.' I wish also to deny this, and I am surprised that Mr. Ingram would take up the time of the House in making such statements, when he could have so easily ascertained the true facts of the matter. But I suppose this would not have suited his purpose. I might relieve Mr. Ingram's anxiety with reference to Conservatives being employed in connection with the building of the armoury, by telling him that Dr. Wilson has frequently stated that he had no objection to their being employed on any part of the works, and that in my negotiations for sub-contract I have stipulated that all available labour in St. Thomas should be employed, irrespective of politics.
The fact is that tbe contractor is a Con- -servative, and in giving the sub-contract, which I suppose he had the right to do, to a responsible man and the lowest tenderer, he made this provision, in consideration of the local feeling, that all labourers in St. Thomas, irrespective of politics, should be given a chance of employment. This shows how groundless such statements are. I have no doubt that if we had the pay-list of this work now being discussed, we would find on it many friends and supporters of the hon. gentleman who has just spoken.


Gilbert White Ganong: The hon. the minister said that he called for tenders and got none. There was good reason why he did not receive any. I know a prominent pier and

wharf builder in the county who has built a number of public works, and is well qualified, and he told me that he would not tender. On my asking him why, he said that the government had made an appropriation to carry the local elections and did nothing, and now they were naming appropriations to carry the Dominion elections, and he had no time to fool away on such business. As the hon. member for Bothwell (Mr. Clancy) said, it was the duty of the minister, if he was going to make an expenditure of $20,000, to have advertised again for public tenders for so large a work. The minister without portfolio suggests that I am opposing the work. I never made" such a suggestion. The government deserves credit for having taken up the matter, but should also show good business administration by letting this work by tender instead of giving it to a party heeler to carry on by days' labour. I put a question on the Order paper, in order to clear the Minister of Railways, just after the last local elections. Letters were carried around in this very polling division, purporting to have come from the Minister of Railways, saying that a vote for the local government supporters would assist in obtaining a grant for a breakwater. Such were the influences used, and if report be true the party who is in charge of the work now is one of the parties who carried these letters around.


James Clancy: We always submit with great humility and proper respect to the ruling of the Speaker, but I desire, because it is important, to draw the attention of the Chairman to Sir John Bourinot's opinion on the point I raised. It will be found on page 408 of the second edition of his work :
Nor is it in order to read articles and newspapers, letters and other communications, whether printed or written, emanating from persons outside of the House and referring to or commenting on or denying anything said by a member, or expi'essing any opinion reflecting on proceedings within the House.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I was not reflecting on our proceedings, but simply giving some facts. An hon. gentleman got up and made certain statements which the Minister of Public Works denied, and I was giving information to show that what the Minister of Public Works said was well founded. I was producing evidence to prove the denial of the minister to be correct.


Thomas Barnard Flint: The statement was not one based on the personal knowledge of the hon. member who made it, and it was open to any other hon. member to produce such evidence as he might have to contradict that statement. The quotation used by the hon. member for Bothwell appears, to a certain extent, to contradict the decision I gave, and I would not like now to make any further positive ruling. Should the point come up
again, when I have the honour to occupy the Chair, I may be in a better position to give more particular reasons.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If I understood the Minister of Public Works correctly, he argued that it was better to have work done by day's labour than by contract; and, in, support of that contention, he said that in the great harbour of Montreal work was being done by day's labour to-day. I think the hon. minister must be aware that in a great city, where the labour unions have been asking that the work be done by day's labour and where there is a great deal of labour in the market, there might be some justification for it, where competent men can be got to oversee the work. But I think he will scarcely contend that tnat establishes the principle for other places.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I did not say that; I did not lay down any rule. I say that there are cases where work can be better carried on by day's labour, and there are other cases where it is better to ask for tender.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understood the hon. minister to go on and support that by saying that it is a common occurrence for the government to find a contractor who is weak financially and who gives them a great deal of trouble, and that he avoided that trouble by having the work done by day's labour. He and other hon. members on that side, including the hon. member for North Oxford (Hon. Mr. Sutherland) seem to forget that some years ago, when they were in opposition, they moved a resolution affirming the principle that no work for more than $5,-' 000 should be let except by contract. That motion was carried and the principle affirmed by the House. These same gentlemen now defend the principle of doing this work by day's labour. Another statement of the hon. minister in justification of this principle was that in one case he asked for tenders but received none. In that ease, he said, he went on with the work by day's labour. But he did not say anything to show that the work was urgent and that he could not wait to ask for tenders a second time. On the other hand, there was another case mentioned in which the work was left undone for two years, a work quite as important as this other. He did not do that by day's labour, but waited until he was able to let a contract. Nobody will contend that work can be done as successfully by day's labour as by contract, when it involves a large amount. The hon. member for North Oxford came to the support of the hon. Minister of Public Works, but, in doing so. he took the very opposite position from that which he took when he was on this side.


Jabel Robinson: I think there are circumstances under which the

Minister of Public Works or any other minister would be justified in having work done by day's labour. I suppose that in every department there are officials who, when a job is to be let, make calculations as to the cost; and, if the tenders are for amounts above what the job is really worth, the government would be justified in refusing to give the work to any tenderer. It is only right that the government should watch over the interests of the people and not allow a number of keen contractors to take advantage of this country. But I do say that if the government, when they undertake to do work by day's labour, should not give instructions to the man in charge of the work that none but the supporters of the government are to be employed-


The MINISTER OE PUBLIC WORKS.: I never did that.


Jabel Robinson: If they did that, it would be an iniquity. No man should be prevented from earning a day's wages because of his politics; and if there is any man on the work who does not earn his money, no matter what his politics, he should be discharged.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have just this very day been caught by the principle so strongly advocated by my hon. friend from East Grey (Mr. Sproule). We require a large quantity of coal for these public buildings here in Ottawa. The contractor who supplied the coal last year offered to supply the coal for the coming season for $5.00 a ton. But the amount of money involved is a large one-$25,000 and more ; and I said to my officers : Let us ask for tenders for this supply of coal. The tenders came in on Saturday; and, instead of getting coal from Mr. Heney by private tender for $5.00, I find that the lowest tender is $0.20. I am going to lose $2,700 for the sake of principle. If I had been directing my own affairs as a business man-as I am, I think-I would have said : This private offer is at the lowest price I can get, and I will take it. But, we have the system of public tenders, and, in this case, I followed it. Still, why should I be scolded, why should I be scarified for following my own judgment where I think money could be saved by that system ? I am not going to pay the money out of my own pocket. In this case I acted upon a so-called principle where, in fact, there is no fixed principle.


George William Fowler: What is to hinder the hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Tarte) from accepting the offer of $5.60 mow7 ? Merely because he has asked for tenders, he is not bound to accept one of those tenders. Or, ! why could he not have ascertained the price of coal in the first place-that would not be ! difficult-and then decline to pay any but a j fair price.


Jabel Robinson: 


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In other words, the system of the lowest tenderer is no good ?


George William Fowler: Not at all.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: You ask for tenders and demand a deposit-and when you have gone through all that formality you go back and accept a private offer.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It means that. Should I be justified in asking for tenders if I am to go back to a private bargain again ? I say this much- that a minister of the Crown should not be looked upon all the time as a thief; there is no sense in that. What does it benefit me to carry on work by day's labour. It does not give me a dollar, but it does give me trouble. I wish to carry out works by day's labour whenever it is best to do so. But I know how it is with hon. gentlemen opposite. I have been long enough in public life to know that when you are in opposition you find fault with everything. But 1 must say that I think that that is not a good thing to do. Because, a party does not remain for ever in opposition. And, when an opposition comes into power, if they have gone too far when on the left of the Speaker, they find themselves in a most uncomfortable position when they cross the floor. My hon. friend has gone too far. Of course the hon. gentlemen opposite may [DOT]not always remain there, doubtless they will come over to this side at some period. But I say they are going too far, they are flaying down a doctrine that no government should be asked to carry out. I do not ask to be dispensed from asking for tenders, nothing of the kind; I am only asking to be treated fairly as any other business man.


Robert Lorne Richardson: I may suggest to the minister, with whom I have a good deal of sympathy, that the fact that he was able to buy coal privately for $5.60 and found, when he asked for tenders, that the price was very much higher, might have suggested to ham that a combine had beeu formed by the coal dealers. If, a combine was formed, and I should think that would be prima facie evidence that a combine had been formed, it would be his duty as a minister of the government utterly to decline to accept any of those tenders, to return the parties their cheques, and to inquire in Montreal, Toronto or other place, as to what was the price of coal. If I were Minister of Public Works, or minister of any other department, I would not for one instant allow the government to be victimized in that manner. I think if he could buy coal at the price he indicates, and found when tenders were called for that a price greatly in advance was being asked, that

should have indicated to him that a combine was formed.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: As an evidence that there was no combine, I may mention that all the prices were different. There was no combine in this case at all. The hon. gentleman would find it difficult, if he were minister in a department, first to make a private bargain, and then ask for tenders and to refuse to accept the lowest tender. He would never be able to carry on public business in that manner. Speaking in a general way, 1 think a minister should be allowed some latitude, he should be allowed to act as any business man would do under similar circumstances.


James Clancy: X agree with the hon. gentleman that criticism to be at all useful must be fair. Now the hon. gentleman first sets up an idol and then falls down and worships it and asks us to worship it. He says that the opposition contends that no work can be done profitably by day's labour. No such contention is made on this side of the House, consequently his argument is not called for. It has been admitted on this side that there are cases in which day's work might be justified. But the hon. gentleman goes further, and endeavours to make it appear to this committee that under all circumstances day's labour is a better system than contract. We admit that when the Conservatives were in power they had the same trouble with regard to straw men being put up to make tenders, and with regard to men failing. But the hon. gentleman's friends contended, and they were perfectly right, that every work ought to be let by tender unless it was of a trivial nature. The hon. Minister of Public Works now dissents from that principle. The member for West Elgin (Mr. Robinson) says that a minister who will give instructions that a public work shall be given only to political friends, does wrong. The minister jumps up and protests vigorously that he never gave instructions of that kind. I tell the hon. gentleman that members on this side can bring case after case where that is being done, whether by his instructions or not. If it is done without his instructions, and he is aware of it, he is just as guilty as if he had directed it to be done. I ask the hon. gentleman, if we are able to show him a case where that is being done, will he take steps to have it corrected ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It wrould be very lamentable if a poor man was excluded from working on a public-work simply because he had voted against the government. I would never give such instructions myself. Of course I would give the preference to my political friends, all things being equal, and hon. gentlemen opposite would do the same thing. The hon. member for Bothwell (Mr. Clancy) must remember that I have been longer in public
life than he has, and I know that this principle has always been followed in this country by the Conservative party when they were in power, they always did exactly what 1 am doing now. I think, perhaps, they went even farther than we are going. For twenty years I was a member of the Conservative party, and I know that they followed the very same policy the Liberals are following now. I do not say that the Conservative party have always excluded Liberals from getting employment on a public work, and we are not doing that either. I could point out in this very building dozens and dozens of Conservatives who voted against us during the last election, and they are not interfered with.


James Clancy: How do you know ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They do not hide their views. I do not try to terrorize anybody, I am not such a small man as that. My officers are fully entitled to their private opinions on political matters, and provided they serve me faithfully, I do not ask them how they voted. I know there are in the public buildings at Ottawa dozens upon dozens of men, even in the Public Works Department, who voted against the government. I have not dismissed them, nor will I do so. They are free citizens to vote as they please, provided they do not manifest open and offensive partisanship. Now I say that it is not only the right but the duty of any government to put in office their own friends in preference to others. I shall do so, and no fair man, whether Conservative or Liberal, will blame me for it. As to excluding poor workingmen from employment on government works, well, a party does not gain much by doing that. It is not my policy, and I do not do it. I give the preference to our friends, but I recommend giving employment to dozens of men who have voted against us. I know it is the best way to get them the next time.


George William Fowler: I am very sorry that the hon. gentleman is so sensitive to criticism. He seems to think that all our criticism is personal towards himself, because, when hon. gentlemen on this side of the House undertake to criticise certain acts of the department presided over by the hon. gentleman, he seems to think that we believe that they are all thieves.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No.


George William Fowler: The hon. gentleman said so.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I was not speaking of myself.


George William Fowler: It may be easy for the hon. gentleman to fall among thieves, and we wish to prevent any danger of that character. We were pointing out that it would

be very much better if large works of this character were let by tender. I understand enough about these matters to know that there are certain works where it is much more to the public advantage that the principle of days' work should be adopted, and [ have no doubt that if you have always the right man as foreman the system of days' work is the best one. But, there is a very great difficulty in getting the right man. Now, it seems to me that the difficulty about weak tenderers can be very easily avoided. If the forfeit of 10 per cent is not sufficient make it a larger amount. Make it so that the forfeit will be sufficient to pay the back wages of the poor labouring men, and sufficient to prevent the public from being defrauded by means of the tenderers not being able to carry out the work. Men will not take contracts for works about which they are absolutely ignorant. These men usually know what they are undertaking when they take these contracts, and there will always be a sufficient amount kept back to protect the public interest. Certainly there is if the tenderer happens to be a Conservative. I do not know how it is when he happens to be a Grit. So long as we have party government in this country I am quite willing to acknowledge that the party in power should give their favours to their own friends. I have no fault to find with that principle, but when it comes down to a question of day's work, I think it is a small piece of business to ask a man how he is going to vote. In general, these things should go to the friends of the party in power, and there will be no criticism from this side of the House. Criticism, as far as I am concerned, is not personal towards the hon. minister himself. I consider him to be a very energetic minister. I do not think he does everything that is right, by a long shot, but the hon. minister has many good points all the same.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In regard to the hon. gentleman's complaint of our criticism and that it has been carried on unfairly, I say that criticism is always justified when a minister departs from a well-understood sound principle, as has been done in this case. That was his failure to let a contract for a $20,000 work but to undertake to do it by day's labour. It was not justified by the urgency of the situation, or by any circumstance that necessitated immediate action. In regard to the tenders that the hon. gentleman received for coal, there was one element that might go to throw light upon the question. Coal might have gone up in price in the meantime, or there may have been an understanding among the tenderers, as we know there was between the tenderers for binder twine. The tenders were all different for binder twine, but they all understood each other, and they were tendering with the same understanding. Why do you put a notice in each ten-


George William Fowler: der that the lowest or any tender will not necessarily be accepted ? It Is because you are able to ascertain what are proper values, and if you find the prices quoted away above these values you are not bound to accept any of the tenders submitted.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We always do so.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It is for that reason. As long as we direct our criticism against any department which has violated a well-understood principle in the letting of contracts, I do not think that the hon. gentleman should complain that the criticism is unfair.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I did not complain of any unfairness-very far from it. We are discussing a very interesting point.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Why did the minister say that it would seem as if hon. members on the other side of the House thought that every man in the Public Works Department was a thief ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, I spoke in a general way. I am very much afraid that I am not as much of a scholar in the English language as I am in the French language.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then, you must think in the French language and express yourself in English.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I do not always make myself clearly understood. perhaps. I do not take what is said as any personal unfairness to me, not by any means. I believe I am treated fairly by the House. I have not a word to say about that, but what I say is that I believe it is very wrong to discuss questions of that kind just as if the minister intended to do wrong. I have not known many ministers who intended to do wrong, in my long experience.


Mr.   M@: lit is amusing to hear hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House whining and lecturing the government and hon. members on this side of the House, because the government are doing in some cases, not in as many cases as they should, I think, just what hon. gentlemen opposite were doing for eighteen years. Surely, they should have more manliness than to whine day after day in this House because the government give a preference, when all things are equal, to their friends. On this question of day labour I do not hesitate to say that in nearly all cases, of course, except in large contracts, in the interest of the department, in the interest of the government, in the interest of the public, and in the interest of the labouring classes of the community, the

system of day labour is very much preferable to that of tender and contract. Tbe contractors of this country are smart men ; their chief idea, when they get a contract, is to make as large an amount of money out of it as it is possible. No one can find fault with them for that. They get their contract, and then they try to get their materials as cheaply as they can. They get the cheapest and often inferior materials for public works, and when they have secured them they will employ the labouring men of the country, they will give them starvation wages and grind them down to the very lowest figures. What protection have the government ? All the government can do is to appoint a supervisor or foreman to watch the contractor. The foreman in any locality, under present conditions, cannot be a better man than the overseer, or clerk of works, or foreman that the minister selects to oversee work done under day's labour, and he is usually the best man to be got in the community. Take a work costing $5,000 and have it done by a contractor, have the same work done under a competent overseer or foreman by day's labour, and when that work is finished it will be worth 25 per cent more to the government than if it were finished by a contractor, and the labourer will get fair wages. Under the day labour system men are hired by the government, or tbe foreman who is acting for the resident engineer, and he will give every man a fair wage. If you give the work to a contractor, he will go anywhere to get a man who will work cheaply, and he will provide inferior material. The government get very poor value from the contractor. Take the question of frauds on the government; if you look over the history of the public works in this country for the last twenty-five or thirty years, you will find that in every case where the department has been cheated or any fraud has been committed on the government, it has been done through a contractor, or through a contract given as a result of tender. In every case where work is done by day's labour you will find that an honest man undertakes to carry out the instructions of a resident engineer and in some cases, although it may cost a little more, the government will get better value, so that, in the interest of the government, in the interest of the public, and in the interest of the labouring men of this country, the system of day's labour is a good one.


George William Fowler: If what the hon. gentleman (Mr. Mclsaac) has said were borne out by the facts, it would be a very nice thing, but unfortunately it is not so. If the person who had control of the work tried to secure the most competent men to take charge, irrespective of any consideration but to do- best for the interests of the country, the picture drawn by the hon. gentleman 110
(Mr. Mclsaac) would be a true picture. But, what are the facts ? The work is given in charge to some political heeler, whether he knows anything about the work or not.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, no.


George William Fowler: I say that is the actual fact.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I say no.


George William Fowler: Irrespective of the fact whether he has anything more than a superficial knowledge, but having no expert knowledge.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: WTould the hon. gentleman allow me a moment; we are discussing this in a friendly way. My instructions to the resident engineers are to accept as foremen only men who know their trade. Every time I have learned that these instructions were not carried out I have dismissed the men. I am standing in my place here, and I ask any hon. gentleman to quote a single instance of where practical men have not been employed. My orders are positive, that in every case a practical carpenter or builder shall be employed. Let me know if these orders have not been carried out.


George William Fowler: The hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Tarte) admits that his cardinal principle is to employ his political friends. Suppose the minister found that a good Grit did not possess the necessary expert knowledge, would he discharge him and employ an expert man in the neighbourhood who was a Conservative partisan ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I would employ him in a minute.


George William Fowler: Under the rules of parliament we are bound to accept that statement made by the minister.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have done it several times already.


George William Fowler: I will accept that statement in the parliamentary sense, but, beyond that, I will reserve judgment.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have a case in mind. I have employed in Shippegan a man who was an opponent of ours. The hon. gentleman is right when he says we must employ good foremen, and there are good foremen in our ranks.


George William Fowler: They are scarce, but you have some of them.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I employ them, but if I am not able to find in place a Liberal foreman, I would certainly employ a Conservative, and why not ?


George William Fowler: Why not ? Just on the very principle laid down by the minister, namely, that the work must go to his political friends. The hon. gentleman from Antigonish (Mr. Mclsaac) has spoken about whining from this side of the House. It is not a courteous term, and it is not true of the very proper criticism which has come from this side of the House. I do not believe that the majority of members on his own side will give their adherence to the principles which he has enunciated ; that it is best to carry on these public undertakings by day's work. He says tne contractors of this country are smart men, but his idea of a smart man is a very different idea from mine. I do not consider that a smart man is a dishonest man, and the hon. gentleman (Mr. Mclsaac) has made an accusation against the contractors of this country which I, for one, do not believe is borne out by the facts. I know many of the contractors of this country, and I know them to be honest, honourable men, who would not be guilty of the acts imputed to them. He says that as soon as they get a contract that their first object is to make money. Well, that is a -very worthy and laudable object. It is the object of most of us to make money or to spend it. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Mclsaac) says that the contractor then tries to get the cheapest and most inferior material. I do not believe that. There may be some dishonest contractors, just as there are dishonest men in other lines of business. Why, even the clerical profession is not exempt from them, and my own, what I call the highest profession in the country, is not exempt. But the great majority of the contractors are honest men, who fulfil to the very letter the terms of their contract, and who put in the material required by their contract. I believe the Minister of Public Works will bear out that statement in respect to the contractors of this country. But, suppose they did not put in the material required by their contract, you have the proper officers to guard the public against fraud, and they surely do their duty. If you do the work by day's labour, our officers buy this timber, and surely they are as competent to judge of the timber supplied by a contractor as they are to judge of it when they buy it themselves.


Mr. McISAAC.: The only point my hon. friend (Mr. Fowler) attempted to make was, that the weakness of the day's labour system was because the whole work was left in the hands of a political heeler, his assumption being that in the Liberal party we could not get competent men to do the work. That statement is' so absurd that I need not argue it. Does it not occur to the hon. gentleman. that when a contract is awarded, the only safety the government has lies in the overseer, who is usually selected from among the friends of the party in power ? There is just as much danger in having an Mr. TARTE.
incompetent overseer in one case as in the other, and there is, therefore, nothing in the point the hon. gentleman makes. I did not say the contractors of this country were dishonest men. I said they were smart men, and I do not think that term is offensive. I said their first object was to make every dollar they could out of the work, and I said in most cases they would slight the materials and slight the work, and I think most men in their occupation would do that when they have the opportunity. The only chance this government has to prevent them doing that is by appointing foremen or overseers, who must be selected from the same class of persons as the foremen under the day's labour system, who usually are selected and recommended by the party in power, under the supervision of the resident engineer. In the one case the foreman is immediately under the resident engineer as in the other. Therefore, the point sought to be made by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fowler) does not amount to much.


George William Fowler: That would not follow at all. The man is in a different position when he is employed by the department as clerk of works to watch the work as it is going on by the contractor. He is then in the position of a paid critic, but when he is running the show himself, he has not the same inducement to look after the work properly. Therefore, you see, even a political heeler might do better work as critic in the position of clerk of works than he would if he were looking after it as foreman of a day's labour job, having charge of it himself. I am very glad my hon. friend has so far modified his first statement as to admit


Colin Francis McIsaac: I did not modify my first statement.


George William Fowler: My hon. friend did modify his first statement, and I am very glad that what I said caused him to do so. He first made the sweeping statement, applied to all the contractors of this country, that their object was to see how cheap and inferior material they could use in their work. Now he says he will admit that there are some contractors who are honest. I think that the Minister of Public Works will bear me out in saying that the great mass of the contractors of this country are honest, upright men.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am sure that my hon. friend did not try to convey the idea that all the contractors were dishonest men-nothing of the kind. Since I have been in office I have had a great deal of intercourse with contractors, and I am glad to say that most of them are honest men. very honest men ; but at the same time a great many of them, honest as they mav be, try to the best of their ability

to evade the fair wages clause. Human nature is there. That is one of the reasons why I make this prophecy, for which I do not charge anything, that the day labour system will become more and more popular. Contractors at present give us a great deal of trouble. I have had complaints from the Labour Bureau in regard to several contractors who had contracts, they by one means or another evade the fair wages clause. Workmen complain of that, and we have to make inquiries to ascertain whether the workmen are right or whether the contractor is right. If we carry out a public work by day labour, with a good foreman-I must always make that condition-there will be no trouble in that re-speet. The government will pay fair wages and will buy good materials. The government do not wish to make a profit ; they have only to see that the work is properly carried out. I understand the objection raised by my hon. friends on the other side of the House. They believe that the day labour system will work to their detriment -that necessarily the party in office will employ more of their own friends than friends of the opposite party. There is something in that; but these are the fortunes of war, and they cannot affect the great principle that the workmen of this country have rights that are not always recognized by contractors, even by the best.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We do not complain so much of that as we do of letting it be known to parties who wish to get emplov-rnent that they cannot get it unless they belong to the government party. I found that to be the case in my constituency. If men were willing to support my opponent, they were not denied work.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I do not wish just now to discuss a work in my hon. friend's riding. When we come to that, he will find that under the contract system the work has not gone on satisfactorily. I will discuss that with him with pleasure when we come to the item.


Gilbert White Ganong: I do not think there is any question in the minds of the members of this House that the Minister of Public Works understands the meaning of the word honesty very much better than the hon. member for Antigonish (Mr. Mclsaac), and I am pleased to find that the minister has not taken this discussion as a personal matter at all. Will the minister give the name of the gentleman who is performing this work at Wilson's Beach under Mr. Shewan ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have not the name here, but I will give it to the hon. gentleman to-night or tomorrow.


Gilbert White Ganong: I regret that the hon. gentleman has not the name. He has stated 110*
that he will only employ men who have ability. Well, the hon. gentleman in charge of this work is a fisherman.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Will my hon. friend give me his name ?


Gilbert White Ganong: His name is Mr. Ethel-bert Savage, unless the government has changed him since the work was started.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My instructions in this case, as in all others, have been that Mr. Shewan must not accept the services of any man whom he does not himself know to be a carpenter or builder. If he has done differently, the man will be dismissed at once, because my orders have been very positive in that respect.


Gilbert White Ganong: Would my hon. friend give me the name of the other man ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Does the hon. gentleman say he is not a practical man ?


Gilbert White Ganong: His business has been that of a fisherman all his life.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I want to ask the hon. gentleman if that man is not a carpenter and builder ?


Gilbert White Ganong: Not in the sense of building wharfs.


Mr. LEMIEUX.: Will my hon. friend contend that because that man is a fisherman he is not an able man ?


Gilbert White Ganong: Not by any means. We have the ablest fishermen in the county of Charlotte that there are in Canada. Can the minister tell me how they procure timber for this work, and who has charge of the procuring of timber ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Mr. Shewan, the resident engineer, gives orders for the timber personally or through his agent.


Gilbert White Ganong: Is it to be presumed that the gentleman in charge of this work would be Mr. Shewan's agent for the purchase of timber ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The foreman will necessarily arrange, and Mr. Shewan will have cognizance of the arrangement and approve or disapprove of


Gilbert White Ganong: Here is a location probably 100 miles from the place where the timber will have to be obtained. On the Island of Campobello there is not a stick of timber fit to go into this work. This wharf will have a face of 50 or 60 feet, as the maximum tide is about 30 feet, and it will have to be built so that a vessel can lie beside it at low water ; and to put a man in charge of such a work, costing $20,000 or $21,000, who has practically no

experience in constructing such a work, is nothing less than an outrage.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I may say that the man now appointed will not be the inspector of the work which is to go on. The acting chief engineer lias just conveyed that information to me. I can assure my hou. friend that I shall be only too glad if he gives me information of anything wrong that has been done or that may be done later on in connection with this work.


Gilbert White Ganong: My impression, and it is one which will be gained by the people today from east to west, after the minister's speech, is that there is a sort of dual Grit Providence, consisting of the Minister of Public 'Works and the Minister of Railways, presiding over our public works and railways, which will only allow Grit partisans to get employment on those works
River St. John, Including tributaries, $16,000.


Mr. WILMOT.: What amount is to be expended on dredging ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No part of this will go to dredging, but will be used in building and repairing wharfs and piers. There is a general item for dredging, out of which the money required to work the little dredge we have built specially for St. John river will be supplied.


Robert Duncan Wilmot: I would like to draw the attention of the hon. minister to the importance of removing those shoals. The Board of Trade at Fredericton has drawn the attention of the government on numerous occasions to the importance of that work, and I am very sorry that there is not some considerable amount voted for that purpose.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I must remind my hon. friend that we have a pretty large amount in the estimates! for dredging in New Brunswick, and out of that amount the work of dredging the St. John river will be paid.
St. John Harbour-Negro Point breakwater,


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is a large breakwater which cost half a million, and this amount of money is required especially to repair that portion of it on which the lighthouse is erected. The waves are tremendously high there and that breakwater requires yearly a large expenditure.
At six o'clock, committee took recess.
After Recess.
Committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Public Works-Chargeable to Income-Harbours and Rivers-Maritime Provinces Generally -General repairs to harbours and river works, $10,000.


Gilbert White Ganong: 


George William Fowler: Has the lion. Minister of Public Works arranged to spend any of this money for wharfs on the Kennebecasis river ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No.


George William Fowler: Last October, shortly before the election, a party consisting of the Liberal candidate, and several members of the local government and the local legislature made a trip through that part of my constituency and made promises that certain wharfs should be built. The hon. Minister of Public Works knows that it has been the custom, for some time past in the building of wharfs on the St. John river and its tributaries, that half the expense is borne by the local government and half by the Dominion government. A wharf was promised


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: By whom ?


George William Fowler: By the then member for the county and candidate for the government-at a place called Gondola Point. I would like to ask the minister if the government intends to build a wharf there or to give any amount toward a wharf along any part of the St. John river within the county of King's ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I did not authorize anybody to promise a wharf. If anybody went there with a promise, it was without authority of the Public Works Department. Some members of the local government may have made promises. No officers were sent there from the Public Works Department.


George William Fowler: No officers of the department accompanied this party; but the government candidate is supposed to speak with authority on a matter of that kind. Of course, I do not wonder that the hon. *minister smiles. But I may say that the place I have referred to is a very important point, a great deal of trade being carried on there, and I trust the hon. minister will see his way clear to expend some of this vote upon wharfs on that part of the St. John and Kennebecasis rivers lying in my constituency.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This vote, as my hon. friend will see, is for repairs and improvements only. This has nothing to do with building new wharfs.


George William Fowler: There is a vote just before this ' River St. John, including tributaries $16,000.' The Kennebecasis would be included in this as a tributary of the St. John. Where is it proposed to spend this amount ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I may say that my hon. friend will find in the supplementary estimates a vote for wharfs of the character just mentioned.


Robert Duncan Wilmot: I desire to call the attention of the minister to the necessity of dredging the St. John river at the Oromocto shoal. The Minister of Railways and Canals (Hon. Mr. Blair), having lived in Fredericton, knows the great necessity of this work. While I am on my feet, I may say that for about twenty years we have never had the honour of a visit from any Minister of Public Works to that section of the country. About twenty years ago, Sir Hector Langevin, while Minister of Public Works was there. And I may say that I do not remember seeing the chief engineer of the department there since Mr. Perley held the position fifteen or sixteen years ago. I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, that this is a most important work, and one in which the people along the river for a distance of eighty miles, including the cities of Fredericton and St. John, are very much interested. When the water is at summer level, many of the vessels that pass up and down must be partially unloaded. This places the commerce along that river in a very deplorable condition, adding very much to the cost of transport.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I should be only too glad to pay a visit to the part of the country the hon. gentleman Mr. Wilmot has referred to. When I took a trip to the maritime provinces some time ago, it was too late when I reached St. John to take a trip to Fredericton. I was very sorry not to be able to go there. My hon. friend is right-either the Minister of Public Works or the chief engineer should travel more than we do. As I said a few days ago. I am coming more and more to believe that the minister should not be loaded, as he is with, so many details. If we travelled more, we should know the country better, and that would be a benefit to the works that are going on and to the country at large. I shall take note of what my hon. friend has told us, and the chief engineer, who is in sound of my voice has taken note of it also.
Public Works-Chargeable to Income-Harbours and Rivers-Quebec-Father Point-Landing pier, $15,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will that complete the works ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No. We are asking for tenders for that work. It Is not a local work, but has been asked for by all the navigation companies of Montreal and all the pilots. This is the spot where the ocean steamers stop, and it is to my personal knowledge that steamers are obliged to wait there for hours because there is not a landing place where pilots can be taken up by the steamers or put ashore from them.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The work will be done by contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.
Public Works-Chargeable to Income-Harbours and Rivers-Quebec-General repairs and improvements to harbour, river and bridge works, $15,000.


James Clancy: The hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Tarte) is increasing this vote $5,000 over last year.


The MINISTER OF FUBLIC WORKS.: The number of works is increasing every year.. and we are obliged to ask for more money because we have more work to attend to.
Hull-Landing pier, $38,500.
Mr. CLANCY'. Is that a very extensive work ? I see that this large vote is asked in addition to $10,000 asked for last year. Is thio for the same work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, the work is under contract, and has been awarded to the lowest tenderer.
Magdalen Islands-Breakwater, $7,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What shape is that in ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The work is going on now at Amherst. This sum will complete it.


Robert Laird Borden: Is it performed by tender ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, by day labour, under an engineer.
Rivibre aux Renards-Pier, $7,000.
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC W^LlvS. This is to be placed under contract by tender.


James Clancy: I see $8,000 was taken last year. How much of that has been expended ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No work has been done. The chief engineer tells me that perhaps we may require a couple of thousand more to complete the work. Anyhow, tenders will be asked for.
St. Alexis-Bais des Ha! Ha!-Pier, $4,000.


Robert Laird Borden: Will the minister explain that ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That work is carried on under an old engineer, Mr. Blais, by day labour. It has already begun. In that part of the country, I may say, the day labour system has been very successful.
St. Jerome-Lake St. John-Wharf, $2,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to complete the work at that place. That district, I may say, is one of the most enterprising of the province of Quebec. New

settlers are going in there every day, and these works are being constructed for their benefit.


James Clancy: When was that work commenced ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Last year, to he completed this year.


James Clancy: Under contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, under (the supervision of Mr. Blais, an old and trusty engineer.


James Clancy: I am afraid the hon. gentleman has sinned again there.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Well, if I am guilty there I am guilty all round, because all our works in that district have been carried on, under the same system. This is a new district, new settlers are pouring in there, as the hon. member for Montmorency (Mr. Casgrain) knows, I know he will justify this vote.
St. Lambert-Cribwork protection wall, $4,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This work is to protect the shores. The work was begun last year, and will be completed this year.


James Clancy: Under contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No.


James Clancy: Now the hon. gentleman has a very large sum there again. I am sure this committee will not object to the smaller sums. It might be a proper thing to have it done by day's work, but the hon. gentle man must know that he has so widely departed from any reasonable mark that he is open to severe criticism.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I may tell the hon. gentleman that this work is under the charge of an engineer iu Montreal, Mr. Michaud, an engineer of long experience. I can assure my hon. friend that these works have been carried on cheaply, well and successfully.
Sorel-Deep water wharf, $100,000.


Robert Laird Borden: With respect to this item, I would like to have it stand in the absence of the hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk).


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I was going to ask to have this item stand myself.


Robert Laird Borden: I would say to the minister that I would like to have it understood that any of these items that we have passed might be discussed again on this particular one, when my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier returns.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Certainly.


Mr. TARTE.: J Tadousac-Repairs to wharf, $1,500.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to complete the work.


Robert Laird Borden: Perhaps the hon. gentleman could tell us so far as all these items are concerned in No. 163, just how much of the work is being done by day's labour and how much is being done by tender and contract.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I can do that.


Robert Laird Borden: The hon. gentleman has not given us that information in all cases as he has gone along. We have not asked for it in all cases. I think it would be more convenient to take them all together, and produce the statement on the next occasion.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I will prepare a statement.
Ontario-Cobourg-Repairs to pier and dredging, $5,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The pier is 450 feet long. The western face of the middle pier is 350 feet long.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Was the $5,000 voted last year all expended ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Up to the present time $3,320 have been spent out of the amount voted last year.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Was that on the pier or for dredging the harbour ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: $659 have been spent on the pier, $1,447.70 on materials and $1,112.65 on dredging.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Have you your own dredge ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).: Is the harbour of Cobourg a private or a public harbour ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I understand it has always been held to be a public harbour.


Samuel Hughes: All these harbours are owned by private corporations.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It may be that some of them are held by private corporations, but they do not keep them up. and the government has been obliged to come to the rescue of the community.
Collingwood-Harbour improvements, $25,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Could the hon. minister tell us in what state of progress this work is ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The contract for which this $25,000 is asked was entered into while I was on the

other side of the ocean, by the lion. Postmaster General (Hon. Mr. Mulock). It provides for a channel 110 feet wide and 20 feet deep at .low1 water. The contract was partially carried out during last season, with a great deal more success than the work was carried out In the previous year. Mr. Boone has a good plant now, and is carrying on the work with a good deal of success. The contract carried out so far was for the inner part of the harbour. This $25,000 and $8,000 that remains is to give the same depth and width outside.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will the hon. minister tell us, in the first place, the length of the channel ? I understand it to be 110 feet wide. I think last year it was understood that it was to be 150 feet wide. Will the hon. minister tell us the length, and how much of it is dredged to a depth of 20 feet ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The length of the channel, dredged to the depth of 20 feet and to a width of 110 feet, is 2,350 feet.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: To what length will the channel be dredged to get to deep water ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I understand that with the $25,000 and with the $8,000 remaining, we will dredge about 3,500 feet more of the outer part of the same channel. Of course, there is a greater depth outside than there is inside.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will that complete the channel to deep water, 110 feet wide and 20 feet deep ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is the contract let for that ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is practically let. We are just making arrangements to carry out the work.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What is the total cost of the work to be ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understood the contract was practically made ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, with Mr. Boone, whose plant is on the spot.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand he was much more 'successful last year than before ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I would like to say, in connection with this vote, that there has been a great boom in Collingwood lately, and that this is going to be a very important place.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There is a shipyard at Collingwood.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not think the channel is wide enough. I am told by vessel men that the channel is not wide enough for
the safety of those ironclad steamers that are expected to come there. It seems to me that it was understood originally that the width was to be 450 feet. This was reduced very much. I do not know whether I am incorrect in my memory, but I think it was understood last year that it was to he 150 feet. It appears that it has now been reduced to 110 feet. That seems to he a very narrow channel, and that incalculable injury would be done to one of these iron vessels if it should strike a rock. I am told that Mr. Boone did the work very successfully last year, and if he is able to continue it the government are likely to get as good value from him as from any one else. I presume that the work has been done on a schedule, and that the work remaining to be done will be done on the same system. I understand that you have done about 2,350 feet, and that you have 3,500 feet to do.
I was not aware that there was very much difference in the depth of the channel inside and outside.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Oh, yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If it be a fact that the outside 3,500 feet is about as shallow as the inside 2,350 feet of the channel, it seems to me unlikely that $32,000 will finish it, if you have spent so much on the inner channel. But, no doubt the hon. gentleman's officers have made a calculation, and there is no doubt that the engineer should know just how much it will take. In my opinion, it is a matter of great importance that the channel should be made wider, because I do not think it is a proper width for the safety of large vessels going in and out of the harbour.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I share, to a very large extent, the view expressed by the hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproulel. I think that the trade of Collingwood is developing so rapidly that it will soon become necessary to widen the channel. The people of Collingwood were anxious to get a channel, and the present arrangement was entered into. We will complete the dredging of the outside channel, and I may say that the dredging is not of the same material ns that of the inside channel. It is not as hard as the dredging of the inner harbour was, and this explains why it will be completed for a little less money. When we have exhausted this sum of money, if the trade of Collingwood goes on developing, I am sure parliament will not hesitate to grant more money. I 'am glad that the hon. member for East Grey shares my view. Collingwood has been one of my pet places. I do not know why I took such a fancy to the place, but I have no doubt it was because the people

were so enterprising. They contributed their own money to this project, and I decided 1 would do what I could to help them.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: When Collingwood gave, as it did, a very substantial sum for this work, the old government were committed to it, and the present government, I understand, carried it out on somewhat the same lines. The people of Collingwood have enterprise, and they are deserving of every consideration. I am glad to know that the minister appreciates it. and that as the government has undertaken the work, he intends to make it what it should be, namely, a first-class job.


Mr. MCCARTHY.: I am sure the people of Collingwood fully appreciate the interest which the hon. gentleman from East Grey (Mr. Sproule) takes in Collingwood harbour. I desire to say for my part, that the Minister of Public Works (Hon. Mr. Tarte) deserves the gratitude of the people of Collingwood for the interest he has taken in connection with their harbour, and the other industries of the town. It is by reason of the arrangement which his department succeeded in making with the present contractor Mr. Boone, that we have such a satisfactory condition of things existing in that harbour to-day. The other contract was not working satisfactorily, but the present contract is giving great satisfaction to the peop'e of that place. The town is thriving to a very large extent, as the hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule) has said, and by reason of the fact that the government are going to deepen the harbour to twenty feet, we have a very large shipping establishment now in progress employing upwards of 300 men, which shows what a town on the inland waters can do if encouraged by the government. The hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule) has taken a paternal interest in Collingwood, and as he has conveyed to the minister the feeling of the inhabitants, I may say that I am perhaps in a better position to do that than he is. because a couple of days before the last election the hon. gentleman appeared in Coliingwood to tell the electors that the Conservative government which he represented were entitled to credit for this work, and not the Liberal government. However, the people of Collingwood saw through the proper spectacles, and by reason of the way in which they cast their votes, I aip here to-night to express their gratitude to the government and to the Minister of Public Works (Hon. Mr. Tarte).


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. gentleman (Mr. McCarthy) is quite mistaken as to what the hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Srpoule) said in Collingwood. I said that the work was undertaken by the Conservatives, and that as the present government had carried it out on the lines laid down by the Conservative government, they were eu-


Joseph Israël Tarte: titled to credit for everything they had done. I did not say a word against them for undertaking the work, but I added I had too much respect for the honesty of the present government to believe that even if their candidate were defeated they would abandon the work on that ajccount. I thought it would be carried out and successfully carried out. That is exactly what I said.*


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Mr. FRASER.: Good for the present government.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What will be the total cost of this work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The total cost without this vote has been


Edward Frederick Clarke: How much would it require to complete the work according to the plans ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: These two sums, the $25,000 and the $8,000, will complete the deepening and widening of the outer channel to twenty feet. It will complete the work for the time being.
Colpoys Bay-Extension of pier, $1,400.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What work is going on there ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The chief engineer told me that they asked $600 last year, but they found it was not sufficient to carry out the work. This work is intended to reach a depth of sixteen feet at low water, the depth now being only eight feet.
Goderich Harbour-Dredging. $7,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How is our friend Dan McGillicuddy getting on with this ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is not for McGillicuddy at all. It is to dredge the harbour.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand he has the contract for dredging ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, not one cent of it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Was not the contract given to him ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, he never had it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Did he not have the duty of farming it out to a friend of his own ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What contract had he ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: He had the contract to rebuild the pier.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I thought he was in the dredging as well ?
.5505


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Now, let us come in or let us come out. He got the contract because he was the lowest tenderer, and he carried it out. Public tenders were called for, and he was the lowest, and he did the work.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We do not object because he got the work, being the lowest tenderer, but I understand he had the manipulation of the dredging as well.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: He did not manipulate the dredging.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It was only the work on the pier he manipulated ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: So long as he did it lower than any one else, there is no reason to complain, though he is a newspaper man.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: He did it all right.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Who did manipulate the dredging ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The dredging was done at the ordinary price of $8 an hour by the Martin Dredging Co. We exact that all dredges must do 600 yards a day, which makes 13J cents a yard, which is not a dear price.


James Clancy: Is that the Martin Dredging Company of Chatham ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No. of Goderich. By the way the dredging company at Chatham about which I was so severely handled without gloves by my hon. friend, have declined so far to carry out the work we have offered them, because they want to work more than ten hours a day. They say that $8 an hour for ten hours work is not enough, and I have not been able to carry out the work so far.


James Clancy: I may say that the Martin Dredging Company of Chatham have a splendid dredging outfit, and they do a class of dredging that is always well done. I do not think that their dredges should be classed with some of the dredges the minister is forced to use, because I am satisfied it is difficult to make a distinction in some cases. I venture to say the dredges are better than some of the government dredges, and the manager is a very enterprising man who will see that the work will be well done. I do not say that because he is a political supporter of mine, for he is not.
I am bound to say what Is right of a man who bears such a high reputation in that business.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Was this dredging work given by contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We have a regular price which was not
fixed by this government, but which was fixed by the late government, namely. $8 an hour, and I have added the condition that the dredges must take out GOO yards a day. That is, 13i cents a yard. We do not pay more than that, even if they dredge more than 600 yards a day. We have an inspector who sees that all the dredges work ten hours a day.


Edward Frederick Clarke: And if they dredge 800 yards they do not get any more ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No. I understand that it will require a small sum of money in addition to complete the work. As some of my hon. friends know, Goderich harbour probably receives the largest lake boats. Last year there were boats drawing seventeen feet of water accommodated in that harbour. One boat carried
116,000	bushels of corn, another 138,000 bushels of wheat, another 112,000 bushels of wheat. The shipping on the Georgian Bay is developing in a marvellous way, and nothing gives me more pleasure than to do this work, because its results appear immediately. As soon as deeper water is provided, additional trade at once follows.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You will require to do more yet, because some of those boats carry as much as 250,000 bushels of corn. I do not object to the expenditure, but I wish to know how much will be required to provide the depth of water needed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I think $7,000 or $8,000 additional will be required to complete the work.
Ontario-General repairs and improvements to harbour, river and bridge work, $15,000.


James Clancy: This might be a proper place for me to inquire of the hon. Minister of Public Works if he remembers a river called the Sydenham, for which there was a vote last year and the year before, and also a place which the hon. gentleman did the people the honour of visiting, called Little Bear Creek. I notice that both of these have disappeared mysteriously from the estimates.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend will find that vote in the supplementary estimates. All the revotes are there ?


James Clancy: They are not in yet. Has the hon. gentleman another batch ? I looked very anxiously, because I know the Minister of Public Works desired to carry on those works, but I was doomed to disappointment. I hope he will now make two statements-first, that he will pub the vote in the estimates, and next that he will spend the money.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend will find in the supplementary estimates the same amount as was

350&
voted last year. I hope I shall he able to spend It this year.
Leamington-Pier, $16,000.


James Clancy: How much of the vote of last year has been spent ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The contract has been awarded only a month ago, so no money has been spent so far. The contract has been given to the lowest tenderer.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is the amount of the contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Who was the contractor?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: John Flock, of Chatham.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will that complete the work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.
Meaford Harbour-Dredging and pile work, $41,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The amount of the contract is $62,570. It was awarded to the lowest tenderer, Mr. Piggott, of Hamilton. He started work, and found that the material was a great deal harder than he anticipated. His plant, I believe, was not a very good one, and the work did not proceed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works and the public. I urged the contractor as well as I could, and lately we have notified him in a very positive manner that he is to carry out his contract, or it will be taken from him and the deposit confiscated. We have given him a writen notification to that effect. I find that Mr. Piggott is bound to lose money on that contract ; but it as his fault. He Should have made borings, and he would have found that the material, instead of being the ordinary hard material, was the hardest that a contractor could face. But all the same he has signed his contract, he has taken his chance, and he has to work it out as best he can. The work has to go on. I am sorry that has taken place, because I know that there is a Chicago company which has undertaken to erect an elevator there and bring down a large quantity of grain. The Grand Trunk Railway have also undertaken to change their station and bring it down to the harbour. I trust that our hopes will materialize and that Mr. Piggott will carry out his work. If not I will confiscate his deposit and take the best means possible to carry out the work. If instead of having a contract. the work had been undertaken by the department under supervision of an able engineer, it would have been completed now. The public and the community will suffer a great deal because that man met with Mr. TARTE.
difficulties he did not anticipate. He tried to avoid his contract, but I would not allow him, although to carry it out may ruin him. I understand that he is fairly well off but not a man of large means. He stands to lose a very large amount of money by his contract. The contract was signed on the 15th June, 1900, and is to be completed by the 15th December, 1901. Of course we have not reached the 15tli December, 1901. but I am very much afraid the work will not be completed by that time.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There was much active work going on during the election. Mr. Piggott was there. He was the contractor for the harbour works and for extending the railway down to the wharf and for the elevator. He had a large number of men on the spot, and some of the people of the vicinity were uncharitable enough to say that the object was rather for the benefit of the Minister of Public Works than the public interest. There were three dredges at work, one brought from Owen Sound, one of the owners of which was the hon. member for North Grey (Mr. Horsey). It would have looked bad to have found that dredge employed in the constituency for which that hon. gentleman was running as a member. During the election time, this was one of the most lively places, and work was progressing very rapidly. Of course all this rather reduced my majority. I told the people that I did not blame the Minister of Public Works because the place required it, and I was glad to see him making the expenditure, and that in the end it would be all right, as the result would be that the people would get the harbour and the minister's candidate defeated.
The work is a very important one. Meaford harbour has this advantage that withiu a few feet of the end of the dock you have any depth of water you require. From 75 to 100 feet to the outside, there is a depth of 25 to 30 feet, so that the largest vessels from the upper lakes will be able to come in without difficulty when this work is done. Then there is a magnificent elevator just about completed, and the Grand Trunk Railway have extended their road down to the elevator. While Collingwood cannot accommodate these large vessels which are bringing heavy loads of grain. Meaford can. and both are supplied by the Grand Trunk Railway. There is a level road from Meaford to Collingwood and from Collingwood to Toronto, and while Collingwood cannot be used for handling grain Sleaford can be successfully used for that purpose. When the elevator is finished, there will be splendid accommodation for loading and discharging vessels. Meaford has given very liberally to get this accommodation. I think she gave $30,000 to extend the railway down to the dock and into the elevator and $25,000 to the elevator, so that this small place has given $60,000 for these purposes. I
I

only ask /the minister to see that the contract is carried out as it was let.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If the contract was let in too great a hurry, no doubt the minister was excusable, as the elections were coming on. The whole thing was done in haste and Mr. Piggott may repent at leisure. 1 believe he is a comparatively wealthy man and has been doing his work fairly well, but it is progressing very slowly of late. Had he continued with the same activity as he displayed last fall, the work would be completed by this.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Mr. Piggott can not go on with the plans he has now and must procure other plans and change his methods. Otherwise he can not possibly carry out his work. He has to dredge in very hard material indeed. My hon. friend complains that the contractor was very active during the elections.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am not complaining ; I am satisfied.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am not displeased myself. My hon. friend is an old member of parliament. Had he been defeated perhaps we would not have been sorry, but personally I would have missed him in the House. He is an old parliamentarian and men of his character are valuable in the House. I am very glad to have him here now.
Owen Sound Harbour-Dredging and extension of pile protection works, $8,500.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I have heard complaints in Owen Sound that this important harbour was not being dealt with liberally enough. Perhaps the hon. gentleman may supplement this grapt by something in the supplementary estimates.
Public Works-Chargeable to Income-Harbours and Rivers-Ontario-Point Peelee Island -Wharf, $2,500.


James Clancy: Will that work be completed during the present season ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We expect it will be completed this season. The contract has been awarded to Mr. Clarke of Wiarton for $7,440.


James Clancy: The hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Tarte) got a vote of $6,000 last year, and this added to the vote of this year will make more than $7,440.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We are asking $1,000 for superintendence and contingencies.
Port Burwell-Improvement to harbour, $23,000.


Jabel Robinson: Will this complete the work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This will be enough to complete the work, but it will not be completed this year.


Jabel Robinson: There is a railway to Port Burwell, and they expect to do a large business. It is important that this work should be completed.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I think the work has been carried on very satisfactorily by Mr. Teall. He is a competent man and we trust him.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is this under contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, it is work of repairs.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. minister had $30,000 last year, and now he is asking for $23,000. Is he going to use all this on one work without a contract 1


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, and it is being done very successfully. If the hon. member for East Elgin (Mr. Ingram) were here, he would tell the hon. gentleman that the work was being carried on most successfully. I may say that I am accused of not having carried it out with the political zeal that my hon. friend (Mr. Ingram) accused me of.


Jabel Robinson: I do not see anything here for Port Stanley. I suppose the hon. minister will see to that ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, there is something here for Port Stanley-to complete the work of dredging.
Providence Bay-Wharf, $1,300.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I see that there was a vote of $7,000 last year.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, the work is under contract with Messrs. A. F. Bowman & Porter of Southampton. They were the lowest tenderers-$7,500; and there is $854 for printing, advertising, superintendence, &c.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: And this completes the work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What depth of water will this give ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It does not appear in my notes, nor can the chief engineer inform me. But a note will be made of the point, and the information brought down.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You expect to complete the work this year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.

Rondeau Harbour-Dredging, $5,000.


James Clancy: Has the contract been let for this work ? I understand the Chatham Dredging Company, at the head of which is Mr. Martin, to whom I referred a moment ago, had the work, or a portion of it last year. Has the contract been let for the coming season ?
South Nation River-Towards improvements at the pitchoff, $5,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What work is being done there ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We are deepening the river to prevent floods.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is it likely to be successful ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The Chatham Dredging Company did part of the work last year, and did it very successfully. They are a good company. This year, we have a dredge of our own which wintered there. It will work first at Port Stanley and will then be sent to Rondeau. But I intend to employ the Chatham Dredging Company in the Thames river first. I suppose they will work under the usual conditions that we exact of all the companies. In point of fact, I have instructed the chief engineer to tell the company to start work immediately on the Thames river on the usual conditions.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes. Mr. Tait has telegraphed me that when the big floods came this year the work has shown to be very successful. There is a part of the river further down that has not been dredged.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I was down there last year, and I found that people in the locality seemed to think that, unless dredging was done further down, the work would not be successful.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I intend to make a full study of the question during the recess.
Rondeau Harbour-To complete repairs to pier,


James Clancy: Is that under contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, it is carried out by our own engineer. It is a work of repairs. I visited the work myself. It would have been next to impossible to take a contract, because, when you start you never know what work is to be done. You take up one piece of timber thinking it will be the last, but you find you have to go deeper and take others.


James Clancy: I see that $9,500 was voted last year. How much of this was spent ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: From the 1st July to the 31st December, 1900, the amount spent was $6,519.


James Clancy: Can the hon. gentleman say what the work will cost when completed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The chief engineer tells me that the amount now asked for will complete the work.
Mr. CLANCY*. Will it be completed this year ?
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS, Yes.
Sheguiandah-Landing pier, $3,300.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is under contract.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I see that $3,300 was voted 'last year in addition to the $3,300 this year. What was the amount of the contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The contract is for $5,900 ; with $832 for printing, advertising, superintendence. &c.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Toronto harbour-Works at eastern entrance, &c., $22,000.


Mr. BROCK.: Will the minister kindly inform the committee if this sum of $22,000 is all he intends to spend on Toronto harbour this year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This sum of money is for a special object, as the hon. gentleman sees, to complete the work at the eastern entrance. We are lengthening that pier so as to prevent the filling up as much as possible. Toronto harbour is one of the most difficult harbours to protect; the current, instead of going from west to east, goes in the other direction ; it is not a fast current, but still there is a current. When a wreck takes place, and any one is drowned, we have found that it is always on the western end. The engineers are all of the opinion that the extension of the pier will have a good effect. The hon. gentleman asks me whether this amount is all the government intend to put in the estimates. Will he permit me to ask him to have a little patience ? When the supplementary estimates come before us. we will deal with that very item. The main estimates only contain votes for expenditure on works already begun. When the supplementary estimates come before us- well, I hope we will not quarrel.


William Rees Brock: Will the sum mentioned here complete the work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We will probably be obliged to ask a revote in the supplementary estimates of the money contained in these estimates, because we will not be able to spend, up to the 1st of July, all the amounts that are included in this year's estimates, but with these amounts we will complete the work of the eastern entrance.

Wiarton-Landing pier, $4,500.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What was the result of the hon. minister's inspection at the time he got stuck in the snow up there V


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The result was very disastrous indeed. I verily believe that if I had not been blocked at that time the result might have been different. However, I have had many reverses in my life, and they have not killed me. There is only one thing that I have to complain of, and that is that the Grand Trunk Railway station is a very poor one, I found life very lonesome and uncomfortable that day ; and I came down to Ottawa very sick, politically and bodily.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The people will not com plain if the minister only carries out his intention, and makes the improvements he intimated to them were very desirable.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I intimated that the port of Southampton is a very important one, and I believe it. We were defeated in that constituency, and I would have been more pleased if we had carried that election, but it will not make any difference. I believe that Southampton is one of the most important harbours in that part of the country, and I believe that something must be done there.
Lake Manitoba-Opening of additional outlets to prevent overflow of lake, $5,000.


James Clancy: One or two sessions ago a considerable discussion took place upon an item for this same service. Now the hon. gentleman is asking sums of money, not for the work of lowering the lake, but for a work, I understand, that is partly of a drainage character. Perhaps the hon. gentleman could give us full information at this time.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The contract was awarded on the 22nd of December, 1898, to Mr. Lemoine, of Montreal, for the sum of 527,500. The contractor did not succeed very well at the beginning, he did not seem to understand the nature of the work. But, be has been doing very well since, and my engineer tells me that the work will be completed in about a month. This sum will complete the work.
Wharf on Lake Winnipeg, $3,400.


Robert Laird Borden: What work is that ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This amount of money is to complete the work at Gimli.


Robert Laird Borden: Is that contract work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It was contract work ; but, God only knows, and myself, the trouble I had with it. There were two wharfs under contract on that
lake, the wharf at Gimli and the wharf at Geyser. In both cases the contractor did not carry out his work, and we were obliged to complete it by day labour, after having all the trouble that decent men should not be subjected to.
British Columbia-Columbia River-Improvements above Golden, $5,000.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the nature of these improvements, and how much will it take to complete ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Columbia river is a very important river, and this is specially for the purpose of dredging, removing boulders and sand. We have a dredge of our own there, which is working well.	*


Robert Laird Borden: Are these works being carried on year after year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes. New sand bars and obstacles of that nature are forming every year.
Fraser River-Improvement of channel, protection works, &c., $10,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is that under contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What did you do with the vote of $55,000 voted last year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We did not spend much last lear, we spent about $24,000. I think I will give some explanation about that work, and take the committee into my confidence. When we took office there had been a large amount of money expended on the Fraser river. The same kind of work that had been carried out on the Fraser river was tried there, that is to say, mattrasses were sunk to make a channel in the river. When we started there was about 12 feet of water. By the use of these mattrasses the Public Works Department made a channel. The water was raised to over 20 feet. Unfortunately the Fraser river is such a powerful and treacherous stream that our works were overpowered. There is a rise at times of 60 feet. I have practically given up hope of maintaining these works. We are trying to maintain Western Island. We have protected it with these mattrasses so as to keep the channel as straight as possible. I had made up my mind to fight against all powerful nature, but, after reflection, after having given a great deal of consideration to this question, I have come to the conclusion that it is better to wait and not to expend any large sums of money now. If the trade of New Westminster and of the country above that point develops, something may have to be done, but I feel I would not be justified in asking from my colleagues and from parliament a continuation of the

large expenditure that was incurred in the past. That is the reason why I am asking this year only a moderate sum of money.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand you have only spent $2,600 ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, $24,000 out of the $55,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is it intended to spend the balance of the $55,000 in that same work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, I have made up my mind not to spend much money this year. The Public Works Department which began that work ten years ago has not been successful with it. The Fraser river is probably the most difficult river in the world to deal with. I do not expect to spend more than $10,000 to protect Western Island.
Skeena river, $6,500.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is that for- dredging ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is a very important river for the canneries. Large quantities of salmon are caught there and we have every year to remove snags and obstacles from the river.
Dredge Vessels-Repairs, $30,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This amount of money is asked every year and spent every year for repairs to dredges and it will apply all over Canada.


Robert Laird Borden: How many dredges does the department own ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In the maritime provinces, we have the St. Lawrence, the Cape Breton, the Prince Edward, the George McKenzie, the Canada, the New Clam Shell dredge, which has no name, and the tug Cricket. In Quebec and Ontario we have the Challenge and tug, the Queen and tug, the St. Louis and tug, the Nipissing and tug, the Ontario and tug, Canals No. 1 and tug. We have in Manitoba, the dredge Quebec, the tug Sir Hector and two coal barge scows. In British Columbia, we have the dredge Mudlark and tug and the snag boat Samson with scows. These dredges have to be kept in order every year. I am forgetting that we have dredges on Lake St. John, on the St. Maurice river and on the river St. John, N.B.


Robert Laird Borden: What kind of repairs are necessary ? Are these vessels injured in the service ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There are a great many breakages.


Robert Laird Borden: Could the hon. minister tell me where these vessels are employed in the maritime provinces ? Take one of them, the St. Lawrence, for instance.


Joseph Israël Tarte: 


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The Cape Breton has been working in St. John during the last three seasons helping to dredge the harbour. The St. Lawrence, was engaged last year in the St. Mary's river. The dredge Canada has been working in Yarmouth during the last two or three seasons. The George McKenzie has been working at different places and is now at Port Hawkesbury.


Robert Laird Borden: Have all these dredges that the hon. gentleman mentioned as being in the maritime provinces actually been at work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, I may say that these dredges are not at all sufficient to cope with the work that we should do. I feel that the Public Works Department has not done what it should have done, and that is the reason why I am asking parliament this year for money to build a new suction dredge that will do the work. The port of St. John should be dredged. It is one of our winter ports. Vessels cannot go in and out at every hour of the day. There is.work for eight or ten years for a big suction dredge in the maritime provinces.
Dredge Vessels-Repairs-British Columbia,


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That is to pay for the work on the dredges.


Robert Laird Borden: The usual vote?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.
New Dredging Plant-Ontario and Quebec, $75,-
000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Would the hon. gentleman make a statement as to how these dredges are getting on that he started so long ago ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We are building a powerful elevator dredge at Sorel for the province of Ontario. This money will be applied for that. I intend asking parliament for another amount for a suction dredge. The trade of this country is developing marvellously, the shipping on the lakes is increasing and as, unfortunately, nearly all our harbours are shallow, unles we provide more depth immediately we will lose our trade. I will lay on the Table of the House a statement of all the calls that are made on us for dredging. This is not a party question, and I ask the support of members of parliament to help me and to help themselves, of course.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand the suction dredge is for the St. Lawrence.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is the elevator dredge. Our dredges in Ontario are inferior and simply waste money. I will ask parliament to grant me

money to build a suction dredge to be used in Ontario exclusively.


Robert Laird Borden: Can the suction dredge be constructed in this country ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Most decidedly. I ask my friends on both sides of the House to visit the shipyard in Sorel. I have been severely criticised for having built a shipyard there, but we are training men who will be able to build not only dredges but ships, and although we may not be able to do it in all cases we should build our ships there as well. I make bold to say that the elevator dredges that we built at Sorel are the best of their kind in America. We have benefited by the experience of the American builders and I have to-day the services of Mr. Robinson, a Canadian, formerly an employee of the Montreal Harbour Commission, who for years was consulting engineer for some of the greatest works carried out in the United States. He has supervised the building of 120 dredges. We have availed ourselves of his services to supervise the dredges now being built at the Poison Works at Toronto and he is also helping us at Sorel. I have good men at Sorel. Mr. Howden, the superintendent, is a very capable man. He is not a highly educated man, but I have been told by those most competent to judge that Mr. Howden has invented pieces of machinery that are not to be found elsewhere. Experience is a great educator indeed.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the mode of operation of these suction dredges ?
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS There is vast machinery inside the dredge and on the American dredges there is a pipe at the front, but we are going to put the pipe in the centre of the hull so as to be able to handle it with more ease. At the end of that pipe there will be a. rotary knife which cuts the material, and In the American dredges that material i3 disintegrated with strong jets of water-. The material we have to dredge is a little harder and we propose to use the rotary cutter to better advantage. This cutter, so to speak, provides the food for the dredge. The suction pump takes that material in at the rate of forty feet a minute and the discharge pipes can throw the material to a distance of 3,000 feet. It is almost incredible to imagine this. The big suction pipe dredge we are building at Toronto will be at work on Lake St. Peter by the middle or the end of August next, and we intend discharging the material to a distance of 1,000 feet. Each piece of the discharge pipe will be 90 feet long supported on buoys of about the same length. The discharge pipe will be partially in the water and w'ill be supported by a scow at the end. We expect very great results from these magnificent dredges. We expect to dredge for a cent a yard, but suppose it will cost two cents, it will be revolutionary. I intend
to have one of these dredges for the maritime provinces. Two are under construction at Toronto now, one for British Columbia and the other for the St. Lawrence.


James Clancy: What will they cost ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The dredge under contract at Toronto will cost $250,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Are they let by contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I would remind the hon. gentleman of the discussion which took place on this subject last year. Since then, a very important steel shipyard has been undertaken at Collingwood, and it would be a magnificent place at which to get these dredges built. There will be both iron and wood there in unlimited quantities. I think it would be well for the hou. gentleman to look into the situation, and see if he cannot get them built more cheaply there than at Sorel. Besides, it will cost a good deal to bring them up from Sorel. Is the hon. minister building at Sorel the scows for the Georgian Bay and the upper lakes ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The scows for use on the St. Lawrence will be built at Sorel; but I do not think we shall be able to build at Sorel the dredges for the lakes, as we have our hands full there. I shall be only too glad to inquire from the shipyard people at Collingwood whether they will be in a position to build a dredge for us, and to ask prices from them.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand that of the suction dredges building at Toronto, one is for use on the St. Lawrence, and the other in British Columbia. There is a great scarcity of dredging plant on the upper lakes and in the Georgian Bay, and I think it would be wise to provide more plant for them.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am building at, Sorel an elevator dredge for the upper lakes, and I may say that my colleagues have allowed me to place in the estimates an amount sufficient to build a suction dredge for the lakes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Where will it be built- at Sorel 1


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No. It is for that dredge that I have said that I shall be glad to get prices from our Collingwood friends.


David Henderson: It seems to me, from what the minister says, that the dredging will be done so much more cheaply by the suction dredge than by the old-fashioned elevator dredge that it would not be wise on the part of the government to continue

constructing more elevator dredges, at any rate until the experiment of the suction dredge is tried. I was surprised, after hearing the great praise given to the new.dredge being built in Toronto, to hear that the minister intended to continue constructing the old-fashioned dredge at Sorel for use in Lake Ontario. To my mind, the better plan would be to at once drop the construction of the elevator dredge until the other is tested.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend will bear in mind that the suction dredge cannot work everywhere. It can work in rather soft material, and also in gravel ; but there remains a vast amount of dredging which the suction dredge cannot grapple with, and therefore we must have both kinds.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Does the minister intend to try the suction dredge being made at Poison's in Toronto harbour before sending it down the St. Lawrence ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I did not think of that before, but I suppose it would be a pleasure for me and the Toronto people to try it there. I understand that the dredge will be completed in Toronto, except that we are making the winches at Sorel ; but the chief engineer tells me that it could be tried in Toronto harbour, and if it worked well we could empty the harbour in a short time.


Mr. BRITTON.: I want to express my great regret that I do not find anything in the estimates this year for Kingston harbour. 1 am grateful, and so are the people of Kingston, for the money that has been expended on that harbour in the past year ; but when we recognize the existing strife for trade by way of the St. Lawrence, the importance of the harbour of Kingston, and the necessity, as the minister said tonight, of helping those who help themselves, then I do think that some further money should be expended this year in dredging in the harbour of Kingston. The city of Kingston, seeing the necessity of meeting the competition for the trade of the St. Lawrence, has done a great deal to help itself in this matter. In the first place, it bonused to the extent of $20,000 an independent elevator unconnected with any of the transportation companies, but simply for the purpose of affording storing facilities for grain. Then, a transportation company, which, although having its head office at Montreal, has its business centre at Kingston, tried to afford facilities for trade by causing to be built in England two large steamships, one of which has been- in the trade for the last four years, and the other for the last three years, each with a capacity of about 90,000 bushels ; and that company, in connection with its transportation business, and knowing that it was not going to make a single penny in the storage of grain,


David Henderson: but simply as a necessity in the transportation business, built an elevator at a cost of $130,000 ; and to this also the city contributed $35,000. So that in both of these ways the city of Kingston has invested large sums of money with an enterprise which I think does it credit. Now, whatever may be the solution of the transportation problem, I do say that Kingston, situated at the foot of the lakes and at the head of the River St. Lawrence, must be an important point in the trade of the St. Lawrence ; and that being the case, we ought to spend more money, and spend it immediately, to make the harbour of Kingston, not a harbour of refuge, but a harbour for the receiving of grain which is to be transhipped there and taken down the St. Lawrence. I find in the estimates an item of $22,000 to afford facilities to connect the Central Ontario Railway with the docks at the town of Trenton. I do not object to that ; I suppose it is necessary ; but when I see that amount for the little town of Trenton, I only regret that the minister has not seen his way clear to put a vote in the estimates this year for Kingston. I put this plea forward as to the importance of Kingston, and because Kingston has helped itself in the way I have mentioned ; and 1 hope that the minister will see, as the people of Kingston do, the necessity of spending more money there, to make the harbour as complete as possible for the purposes of trade.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am very thankful to my hon. friend for having stated that he thinks I have done what I should for the city he represents so worthily here. I am taking from my dear St. Lawrence channel one of the most powerful dredges and sending it to work at his town. In one season we did more work there than we did the ten previous years. I have not forgotten Kingston this year. I am having a survey made of the St. Lawrence between Kingston and Prescott so as to know exactly how we stand. The Department of Railways and Canals have been testing the channel. The lakes and rivers are in the Department of Public Works by law, but all the same the Department of Railways and Canals, having charge of the canals, have practically so far taken that part of the River St. Lawrence and the lakes between Montreal and the upper lakes under their charge. The survey of the St. Lawrence between Kingston and Prescott will be finished this fall. I intend using a part of the $75,000, which my hon. friend will find a little further down in the estimates, for dredging the channel at Wolfe Island, so as to allow ships coming down to call at Kingston, which they cannot do now. I recognize the importance of Kingston, and 'will endeavour in the future, as I have in the past, to do what I can for that enterprising city.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand there was an application to the department to get some dredging done at Thornbury. I see nothing in the estimates so far. '


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That work will be carried out, with money taken from the general vote for just such *work at Kingston.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I hope the hon. gentleman will spare enough out of the appropriation to do the work there.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No doubt, the chief engineer will take note of the amount necessary.
out the harbour, and that she was doing work at Summerside harbour around Holman's wharf. Mr. Holman is one of our largest shippers of produce, and I would like to see him afforded every facility, but the dredge would be better employed in the harbour of Edmund Bay.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I will inquire the number of days she worked at Holman's, if she worked there at all. I would be very much surprised if she worked any length of time at his wharf, but if she did her services were paid for. I will take a note and give the hon. gentleman the information.
Dredging-Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, $87,000.	[DOT]


Edward Hackett: Where will the Prince Edward do dredging this year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I understand that she will be engaged in the harbour at Summerside to a very large extent, at any rate.


Edward Hackett: Has she not been working around the wharfs of private individuals and have they paid for the work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I do not believe that she has worked for private parties, but, if so, they have paid. At times we have to yield to pressing demands and do some private work, but I do not like it.


Edward Hackett: In the island we onlv have this dredge, which is a very old one, and I hope the minister will provide us with one of greater power. This was built by the governor of the island previous to confederation. We have around the shores great necessity for a first-class dredge.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am starting now the construction of a powerful suction dredge, which will have to do for eight or ten years in the maritime provinces. It cannot do the work alone, and we have several others. The two best are the St. Lawrence and the Canada, but both are elevator and hopper dredges, which carry their own load, which is a great waste of time. I intend equipping one of those ^ ith shoots so <is to be able to double the work. When the hold of a dredge is full it has to hoist anchor and go three or four miies and unload and come back to work There is no sense in that. I intend equipping at any rate, one of those dredges with shoots so as to do more work. With the plant of the public works as it stood as we took office, we could not possibly carry out the work we have to-day. We are getting in better shape now', and in a year or two wre will be in good shape.


Edward Hackett: When I was a candidate at a by-election. I was told that the Prince Edw'ard wTas going to Edmund Bay to dredge 111
Public Works-Chargeable to Income-Dredging-Manitoba, $8,000.


Mr. ROCHE (Marquette).: Is it the intention of the government to dredge the mouth of the Mossy river at Winnipegosis this summer ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The hon. gentleman knows that we have only one small dredge for Manitoba, which is now at Winnipeg. Mr. Lemoine, who has done some work for us, has offered his dredge for sale. Perhaps if we could secure another dredge we could do more work than in the past.


William James Roche: There is a bar at the mouth of this river which is an impediment to navigation. There is a large trade growing up there both in fish and in lumber.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Is there a considerable ^settlement there ?
Mr. ItOCTIE (Marquette). Quite a settlement. There is the town of Winnipegosis. For the last two years the water has been very high, but still vessels have grounded. When the water is down to ordinary level, as it will be about midsummer, the obstruction to navigation will be very serious.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I will instruct the resident engineer to make an investigation.
Mi\ ROCHE (Marquette). I notice that the following appears in the press of that district :
Engineer Malhoit, of the Department of Public Works, will shortly arrive there to make preparations for taking soundings at the mouth of the Mossy river, with a view to having the obstructions to navigation removed by dredging The dredge is at present at Fairford on Lake Manitoba, and when the water is clear of ice it is the intention to bring it to Lake Winni-pegosis via the Water Hen river.
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS My officers remind me that the Minister of the Interior (Hon. Mr. Sifton) applied to me for this work, and I promised to send an engineer. I had forgotten that.



Slides and Booms-St. Maurice District-Improvement and reconstruction of booms in St. Maurice district between Grandes Piles and tbe city of Three Rivers, $25,000.


Robert Laird Borden: Will tlie lion, minister please explain this ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Hon. gentlemen will remember that there was an item in the supplementary estimates in which I explained the nature of this work. There is a very large development of trade there. There is the manufacture at the Grande Mere and the manufatures at Sliawinigan. I believe that this year 3,000,000 logs floated through these booms, which are a paying property. These works have been carefully planned and are being carefully supervised by Mr. Berlinguet, an old officer of the department. This is a necessary work, and one of the few that are paying.
Roads and Bridges-Des Joachims Bridge-Reconstruction, the Ontario government contributing $4,000, and the Quebec government, $2,000, $20,000.


Robert Laird Borden: What is this V


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There are two contracts that have been awarded so far. One of them is for the construction of two stone piers and abutments over the main channel, $13,000. Another is for iron works superstructure for the main channel, 221 feet and two spans of 97A feet each-$19,570. This is for the south channel of the river. We are going to ask for tenders for the construction of the centre pier and two abutments of stone for the bridge over the north or slide channel. We estimate that that work will cost $10,500. There are the stone approaches for the two I have just described, which the chief engineer estimates will cost $10,000. Then there are iron superstructures for the north channel, which we suppose will cost about $11,000. There is also superintendence, contingencies, &c. The whole work will cost about $70,000. This was authorized last year.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not remember any explanation of this last year. On what principle does the hon. minister take up the building of this bridge ? It appears to be an interprovincial bridge. Where is it located, and what makes it necessary for this parliament to build a bridge ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Last year parliament was asked by the government to place an amount in the estimates for this bridge, and I am only carrying out the work that was then authorized.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The minister has given no explanation with reference to the bridge, on what principle he is building it, where it is, nor for what purpose.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is a general traffic bridge. Thel govern-Mr. TARTE.
ment has been building bridges in several parts of the country, whether that is a wise policy or not is for the House to decide. But "the work has been done last year, and I am responsible for it as a member ot the government. I was not here when the vote was placed in the estimates ; but the hon. gentleman was a member of parliament last year, and hp agreed to that vote which I am now expending. I may say that this bridge is built to replace an old bridge that was built long ago by the late government.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is it for the accommodation of certain railways ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, it is for the accommodation of the people' in that locality. I would like very much if they were here to defend this item.


Robert Laird Borden: We cannot And out where it is. We have asked the hon. gentleman six times where it is, and he cannot tell us.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Where the bridge is ? Why, it is over the Ottawa river. We have got two bridges of the same kind over the same river. Ike people from that part of the country came to my colleagues and convinced them that they,* the people, were unable to build these bridges. My own opinion was-I stated it frankly years ago-that the provinces of Ontario and Quebec should have built those bridges, as they are interprovincial ; but parliament decided otherwise, and I am carrying out the orders of parliament.


Mr SPROULE.: I am not complaining of the minister's desire to carry out the wishes of parliament. He says that I was here last year and assented to this ; I have no recollection of hearing this item discussed, or of hearing any explanation of it. This is practically an interprovincial bridge, and if this parliament is going to take up schemes like this the minister will have a great many applications in the future, and if he does not grant aid to the people who come from the different localities asking for bridges, he will create jealousy among those whom he refuses. There should be a strong reason given to parliament before we are asked f11, monpv for the Dumose of these
bridges.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: What is the use of talking ? Parliament voted the money last year, the contract has been awarded, and I am simply carrying out the order of parliament, of which the hon. gentleman himself was a member. The bridge is under construction, the Dominion Bridge Company is building the iron work, the contractors are building the stone work. During my absence last year these two votes were placed in the estimates by the government and passed by parliament.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: They were placed in the estimates by the minister's own department,

or by lids engineers. There must have beeu some information submitted to council on which the government asked parliament to vote the money. What we want is that information. The minister must have had some information laid before him when he submitted this item to council.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The information was that people from that part of the country represented to me, both in 19IX) and in 1899, that the old bridge built by the late government was falling to pieces. There were debates in the House. Mr. Poupore, then representing the county of Pontiac, pressed the claim of his county strongly in the House, and he was joined by the hon. member for Renfrew (Mr. Mackde). For two years, I think, these claims -were pressed upon us. This is an interprovincial bridge. The late government built a bridge over that river.


James Clancy: ' In what year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In 1884, I am informed. I was asked to follow the same policy. 1 may say that at first I opposed it, I am not revealing any secrets when I say that I opposed the (policy, and if my hon. friend was in the House at the time he must remember that I took my stand against the contention of the member for Pontiac, and I held that the two provinces, Ontario and Quebec, should build those bridges. But my views did not carry weight enough. Parliament voted the money, and when I came back I simply found the amount in the appropriations, and I went on to carry out the orders of parliament.


Robert Laird Borden: It looks as if something of a trick was played on my hon. friend by some of his colleagues with respect to this.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, I was frank about it, I believed that the two provinces should build the bridge, and I said so. They are wealthy, and I think they might afford to build these bridges. I do not stand here and acknowledge that the Federal government should build bridges everywhere over waters like that.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If that principle is adopted, we might as well vote the whole money for building this bridge across the Ottawa here, which is an interprovincial bridge, and quite as valuable as the one referred to. Would the minister say if the bridge which was built sixteen years ago is already worn out and requires to be renewed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It was a wooden bridge. The bi'idge actually fell down and it had to be rebuilt. Now, I have no more to say on that point. Iam carrying out the orders of parliament.


Edward Hackett: This was merely a traffic bridge ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Edward Hackett: Well, I belong to a province that it is impossible to unite with the balance of the Dominion by means of a bridge. We can never have a bridge and yet -we are called upon to contribute in these estimates to the building of a traffic bridge between Ontario and Quebec. At the present time the government is building a railway known as the Southern Railway, from Charlottetown, seventy miles east to Murray harbour. That railway was the means of bringing to this House a supporter of the government, but, while the government is building that railway, it is calling upon Prince Edward Island to contribute $10,000 a year in perpetuity for the building of a bridge across the Hillsborough river, about half a mile in length. I believe it is very unfair, that we in the province of Prince Edward Island should be asked to do this. I appeal to every fair-minded gentleman in this House irrespective of the government, to every man who desires to see justice and fair-play, is it not wrong that the people of Prince Edward Island, who have no opportunity of being united with the mainland of Canada by a bridge, such as you are building across the Ottawa and uniting these two provinces should be called upon to contribute this sum. I hold that we should be exempt from this sum of $10,000 a year taken from our subsidy for the right of using a carriage driveway alongside of the railway, such as I saw the other day across this bridge from Ottawa to Hull, where you can drive along with your carriage. You are taking $10,000 a year from us. You are asking us to contribute a portion of the cost of these bridges across the Ottawa, and yet you are taking from the people of Prince Edward Island $10,000 for the right of a carriage way across that bridge. It is unfair. I am not appealing to you from sordid motives, but I appeal to you from motives of justice and fair-play, and I ask you that, when the people of Prince Edward Island are obliged to pay their full share for the building of those bridges, they should not be required to pay $10,000 for the bridge across the Hillsborough, in that province.


Mr. BELCOURT.: I would like to ask the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hackett) if, in his province, they have subsidized steamers ?


Edward Hackett: Subsidized steamers ?


Napoléon Antoine Belcourt: Yes, the hon. gentleman is right. When confederation was entered into it was agreed that the Dominion of Canada was bound to subsidize these steamers to convey the mails between Prince Edward Island and the mainland winter and summer. What is the point of the hon. gentleman's question ? . It is senseless; it is useless.


James Clancy: I would like to ask tlie lion. Minister of Public Works if be bas in bis department plans and specifications of that bridge, and if be is prepared to say bow mucli of tlie cost devolves on Canada for a work that bas been clearly pointed out to be a provincial work, a view which the bon. gentleman himself held.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: The aggregate amount for work at the Des Joachims is $70,000. It is a large amount of money.


James Clancy: I see that Ontario is to contribute $4,000 and Quebec $2,000. Does the bon. gentleman mean to say that his department bas sanctioned a scheme belonging exclusively to the provinces and costing $70,000 of which they contribute the very small sum of $0,000 ?	1 am sure the
hon. gentleman will admit that so far as be is concerned, whether he was in the House or not, makes no difference


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: I am responsible.


James Clancy: The bon. gentleman is as much responsible as if be were in bis place in tlie House.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Certainly.


James Clancy: And unless the bon. gentleman bas more than the bald statement of the parties that it is going to cost so much, if he has no plans and specifications as definite as he would have if it were a work belonging to the Dominion of Canada, I am afraid he is in a false position.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: A plan of the work has been carefully prepared. The amount that we are willing to pay ourselves will not be $70,000, because the two provinces will contribute $0,000. Tlie amount to be paid by this parliament will be $64,000. The plans have been carefully prepared. The question bas been mooted long enough before us ; we know all the details of the work.


James Clancy: I would ask the hon. gentleman if the matter bad been submitted to him and if be bad finally consented to the expenditure being made before be left ? It was the lion. Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding), I understand, who was acting minister during bis absence.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, the Postmaster General.


James Clancy: Well, that is unimportant. I would like to ask tlie bon. gentleman if tlie acting minister took upon himself to consent to an expenditure of that kind, because it is very extraordinary.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, my hon. friend knows parliamentary government well enough to be sure that the Mr. BELCOURT.
lion. Postmaster General acted with the consent of his colleagues. The year previous I did state from my seat in the House in reply to the contention of both my bon. friends from Pontiac and Renfrew-, as ' Hansard ' will show-I cannot swallow my words-that in my opinion it was not our duty to build this bridge, but, as it was their right, my colleagues did not share that view. If they did not share that view parliament agreed with my colleagues and the amount was placed in the estimates.


David Henderson: I would like to ask tlie lion, minister if anything bas been done in the way of spending money on this bridge V


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, the work is under way. Two contracts have been made already, and all the other contracts are ready to be advertised. The whole thing is under way now. It is too late.	.


Robert Laird Borden: On what principle were these contributions fixed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: On account of the work being an interprovincial work, the two provinces agreed to pay the amount specified. It is a very small amount indeed.


Robert Laird Borden: Was there any particular basis at all ? Was that all you could get from them ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They declined to give more. I negotiated with them myself and they declined to build the bridge. I feel that we should not be dragged more deeply into that policy. We have done it under circumstances that are easily explained. There was previously a bridge which had been built. The bridge was there. It was a good argument so far, but I am* not going to stand in my place in parliament and say that this parliament is bound to build bridges over rivers running between two large provinces. The late government has done it, and we are doing it now, but I think I am echoing the opinion of members on both sides when I say that we must not go too far in that direction.
Ottawa-Maria Street Bridge-Reconstruction, $13,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is that to complete ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes. The Canada Atlantic Railway is bound to pay a share of that, which I think will be about $30,000.	-
Telegraph Line, North Shore of St. Lawrence- Extension to Belle Isle Island, $18,500.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to complete the telegraph line between the Bay of St. Paul and Belle Isle. We are just equipping a steamer to lay the cable, and I believe the work will be completed early in the season.


Gilbert White Ganong: The other evening the minister used the expression, ' We mean to be fair to everybody.' I ask him now if he means to be fair to the people of Deer Island, whose claims I have put before him for the last few years in connection with their need of a telegraph line to the mainland. When the minister was making his trip over the eastern provinces there was a swell lunch prepared for him in the county of Charlotte, which he failed to get. He took the direct route from St. John to Montreal. The lunch will be a little stale If he does not hurry up and get there. I have on several occasions drawn his attention to the fact that Deer Island has a population of 1,700 dependent on the fisheries, that their market is at Eastport, Maine, where they sell their fish which is largely composed of sardines, and they have absolutely no communication except that by the steamer which calls twice a week. Hi's own engineers have made an estimate of the cost of the line connecting the different fishing villages and the town of Eastport at a cost of $3,500 ; a very small sum.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: What is the distance ?


Gilbert White Ganong: From the Island to the mainland across the passage, about three-quarters of a mile, and there would be ten or fifteen miles of land line. This is a most important matter to the inhabitants of that locality, and the minister should look into it at once. Owing to the high tides the fishermen can only get across the passage at certain periods ; the fish are very perishable, and if the people were put in telegraphic communication with this great market of theirs, it would frequently save them hundreds of dollars on the value of their cargo.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I will remember the observation of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Ganong). I do not recollect having read the report of my officers.


Gilbert White Ganong: The report was made in 1897.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I will take a note of it, and at the same time I assure my hon. friend that the next time I go to the maritime provinces I will endeavour not to miss any swell lunch that may be prepared for me.
Telegraph Lines-British Columbia, $38,500.


Robert Laird Borden: There may be some discussion on this item, and perhaps it would be better not to deal with it tonight.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is not the Yukon line. This is an old line we have re-poled.
Mr. BORDEN (Halifax. Where is the item for the Yukon line ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is under capital account. I will not ask a vote for it to-night, because it is rather late, and I am tired.
Surveys and inspection, $25,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: When work is asked for by members of parliament or by our officers we send engineers to make a survey, and this is the usual vote. I would like to have it a little larger, because the work asked for is increasing every year.
National Art Gallery, Ottawa, including the purchase of paintings on the advice of a committee of artists, $4,000.	*


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My colleagues have been good enough to give me $2,000 additional this year. The paltry sum of $2,000 was barely sufficient to pay the caretaker, and my colleagues have agreed to place at my disposal $2,000 additional, so that we may buy paintings on the advice of artists. I shall be very glad if we can help some young Canadian artists by buying their works. Of course, we do not bind ourselves to buy Canadian works exclusively. We are not doing enough for art, I think.


Robert Laird Borden: Viewed from the standpoint of a national art gallery, I do not think the amount is excessive. Of course, the question remains how much this country can afford for matters of that kind. I would like to ask how much of this $4,000 will be available for the purchase of paintings ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We spend about $1,000 for the caretaker and maintenance of the building. That will leave $3,000 for the purchase of paintings.
Chief Engineer's Office-Salaries of engineers, draughtsmen and clerks, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $49,700.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is the meaning of the words ' notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act' ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: A law was passed which obliged us not to pay more than $400 for our emplovees. At this date it is out of the question to get for employees men who are worth anything for that sum. The cost of living is increasing, and salaries and wages are increasing. That is why we have to insert these words. I think that law should be changed.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understood there was a permanent staff ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There is, but we employ a good many temporary men. and we have to pay them more than $400 a year.


Robert Laird Borden: Is it an economical administration to have so many temporary employees ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Men who are employed temporarily are not entitled to superannuation. That is a saving, to a certain extent. Whether it would be better to have permanent employees all through, I am not ready to say yes or no ; but, I say without hesitation, that it is out of the question not to employ temporary men. The work is not equal at all times. There are times when we need more men than at other times. Therefore, we must have temporary employees, although I am strongly in favour of having a staff of good permanent employees, provided they do not interfere in politics, and provided they work. I may say that I know now the public service fairly well ; and while there are men who do not like to work, there are a good many who work hard. I cannot complain of the heads of my department. They work well ; they work too much for what they are paid.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Can the hon. gentleman say how many temporary hands he has employed now ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Counting the different resident engineers and their assistants, all over the land, we have 42 temporary employees in the chief engineer's branch.
Chief Architect's Office-Salaries of architects, draughtsmen and clerks, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $22,700.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That is on the same principle, I suppose ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: On the same principle. I may say that these amounts are too small. The work of my department lias doubled. Last year, if I remember rightly, it amounted to $6,500,-
000.	In former years it was about $3,000,000. The work has doubled, and my officers have pretty hard work.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. minister has increased his expenditure very much.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Well, the country is growing, and the department is growing with the country.


James Clancy: I think I remember a discussion which took place in 1897 on these items, when the hon. gentleman had dragged several employees to the block and had their heads taken off. I think the hon. gentleman was then under the influence of strong feelings of economy, and he proclaimed to the country that lie was making a great saving. I am glad to see that the hon. gentleman lias found out at last that there was work to be done in his department, and that he was a little hasty when he dismissed those officials. I do not know whether he has taken them back or not, but they suffered all the same. The hon. gentleman was going to run the department with $13,000- I am speaking from memory.


Robert Laird Borden: 


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, no ; I never said that.


James Clancy: The hon. gentleman said a good many things that he cannot remember.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: If I said I would run that department with $13,000, I will not say it again.


James Clancy: I said a reduction in the two items of $13,000. I judge, from the tone of the hon. gentleman to-night, that he has quite changed his mind.
Telegraph Service-Salaries of staff, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $4,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Where are the telegraph operators employed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There has been a new employee. Our telegraph service has increased in length, and we require more employees.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I notice an item in the press about dismissals from the hon. gentleman's department. It says that he dismissed some seventy men.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We are employing a pretty large number of men and of course my department is governed by the ordinary law of supply and demand. When we have more work we employ more men. There was a pretty large number of men we did not require any more, labouring men, and we dispensed with their services. Of course there is grumbling. When I took office I found a secret stairway in the department and did away with them, but I am sorry I did so. I should have kept that secret stairway because I cannot get to my room without being followed all the way up. I understand that Sir Hector Langevin built that secret stairway to avoid this pressure, and I regret having dispensed with it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Had the election over here a couple of years ago anything to do with the large numbers in the hon. gentleman's department ? Or were these men much longer in the employ of the government than that ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There have been two or three dismissals since that election was over ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The papers say seventy.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The papers mean well, but are not always well informed.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Were these old employees or only taken on recently ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There were no permanent men. Some had been employed five or six years and others a few months. I instructed my officer to keep the best men. Some good men have

been dismissed, and I would liave been very glad to keep them all, but I cannot pay them out of my own pocket, and the department does not require them. Some were in the department five or six years, others only a few months. I see that the Citizen of this morning states that I dismissed fifteen men in the mechanical department, and out of these thirteen were English and two French. The reason is the mechanical department is almost wholly composed of English-speaking gentlemen.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Though I am not disposed to recommend the keeping of men when there is no work for them to do, it must have been a great hardship to many men, who were employed five or six years consecutively, to have been thus dismissed. What possibility is there that the hon. gentleman would be soon filling up all their places again ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend remembers that fit is a privilege to have been employed one, two or three years and that other men might have their turn. I feel inclined to take back good employees and we do so. If we want men back we generally make an examination among those whom we have employed and who were good men.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Many people are inclined, are uncharitable enough to believe that the hon. gentleman dismissed these people in order that he might put others in their places. It would be only just to these men that they should be taken back when their places require to be filled.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Nothing gives me greater pain than to dismiss men, but on the other hand, this is not a charitable institution. At times all Ministers of Public Works have had to yield to public pressure. The position of the Minister of Public Works is by no means a comfortable one. There is no department in which there is more trouble, and I wish that some abler man had taken hold of it when this government was formed.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How many did the hon. gentleman dismiss ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: About 45 or 50-15 mechanical, 25 labourers and 10 or 12 painters.


James Clancy: How came the hon. gentleman to make a raid on the mechanical department ?	[DOT]


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It had become too large. There was no special raid on that department. During the last three or four months I have dismissed 100. Mr. Ewart is chief architect. He asks the heads of the different branches to report the number of men they want and the number they can dispense with. On their reports I dismiss the men we do not require.
The chief of the mechanical department is Mr. King. It was on his report that 15 men were dismissed. The head of the painters is Mr. Cote and the head of the labouring men is Mr. Breton. It is on their report that those dismissals were made.


James Clancy: Do not the reports contain the names of the men ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I called Mr. Ewart in and asked him how many men he wanted to keep. I said to him : Do not make any party politics, but keep the best men.
Public Works-Chargeable to Income-Miscellaneous-To cover balance of expenditures for works already authorized for which the appropriations may be insufficient, provided the amount for each work does not exceed 5100 (amounts shown opposite appropriations affected), $3,000.


Byron Moffatt Britton: I desire to make a short statement and an appeal to the Minister of Public Works with reference to a matter that has been hanging fire for a couple of years. I think the House will sanction the minister in paying the amount. Before the drill hall in Kingston was located, an architect of unquestionable repute and ability was asked by the district officer commanding there to look at the different sites owned by the government, and make some measurements, and be ready to assist in locating the site when the minister came from Ottawa.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Who was the district officer commanding.


Byron Moffatt Britton: Col. Montizambert. The minister made his visit, and, in company with several of the military men, and a number of other gentlemen in Kingston, visited the different properties owned by the government. The architect to whom I have referred made measurements and a rough plan. Afterwards, when it was decided to erect an armouries building, the plans were made by the architect in the minister's department in Ottawa. When the building was being erected, a superintendent of works was employed, but it was not the architect to whom I have referred. This gentleman has moved away from Kingston and is living in British Columbia. His wile still re'sides in Kingston. A bill was rendered by him for his services in making the rough plans, taking the measurements, &e. The bill is a moderate one in my opinion, and in the opinion of architects. But a difficulty has arisen like this-the minister says : I cannot recognize this account unless it is recommended by the Minister of Militia ; and the Minister of Militia says that he never authorized the work, and that his department knew nothing about the work done by Mr. Newlands-that is the gentleman's name-and so he cannot authorize the account to be paid. Here was a

work actually done. Some benefit was derived by the government from the work, because to build properly, it was necessary to have measurements of the sites and rough plans of the building that could be erected on one'or other of these different sites. I make this appeal in Committee of the Whole to the minister on behalf of Mr. Newlands. He is no longer in the province and cannot attend here in Ottawa to urge his claim. His family have not yet removed out of the province. Of course, it would be no argument to say that the person making the claim is in need of the money, and I do not know that I should be authorized to say that. But I say that knowing what he did it seems a just and fair claim, and I regret that I have not been able to get the Minister of Militia to recommend it or the Minister of Public Works to recognize it without that recommendation. All I can do is to say as I am saying now- and it cannot be fairly contradicted it seems to me-that this money has been earned by this architect, and ought to be paid. If there was no authorization, there was at least recognition by the minister going to these sites and doing what he did. The amount of the claim is $125. I think the sum is reasonable. But, if not. then some sum that is reasonable ought to be paid. I ask the hon. minister to look into this matter, and put in an item into the supplementary estimates to pay this claim.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I quite admit that it is a meritorious case. I have looked into the matter myself. There is evidence that Mr. Newlands was asked by Col. Montizambert to look over the sites and prepare plans. Col. Montizambert was in no way employed by the Department of Public Works, in no way connected with that department. Lacking that connection, I cannot see that I would be justified in putting the amount in the estimates. But if my hon. friend the lion. Minister of Militia (Hon. Mr. Borden) were in his seat, I think he would be convinced by the statement my hon. friend has just made. And I would invite him to go again to interview the Minister of Militia. 1 shall be ready to abide by the decision of my colleague.
Public Works-Chargeable to Collection of Revenue-Repairs and Working Expenses- Harbours, docks and slides, $96,400.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: All these are votes that do not call for discussion.


Robert Laird Borden: I was just about to suggest that as wo have voted $1,200,000 we had better stop.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: These are mere routine votes.
Public Works-Chargeable to Collection of Revenue-Land and cable telegraph lines of the Mr. BRITTON.
sea coast and islands of the lower rivers and the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the maritime provinces, including working expenses of vessels required for cable service, $32,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is the government extending this telegraph line ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes. I have a vote from parliament of $7,500 to build a line to Belle Isle. They are building it now, and it will be completed by the beginning of August.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: This is to defray working expenses ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, that only.
Some resolutions reported.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE moved the adjournment of the House.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What business will be taken up to-morrow ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We shall probably take up the Election Bill in the afternoon, if found convenient. Following that, we shall proceed with the estimates of the Minister of Railways.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 11.15 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, April 23, 1901.