VACANCY-WEST HASTINGS.

Mr. SPEAKER.: I have the honour to inform the House that a vacancy has occurred in the representation of the electoral district of the West Riding of the county of Hastings, by the resignation of Henry Corby, Esq. In accordance with chapter 13, section 5, subsection 2, of the Revised Statutes of Canada, I have issued my warrant to the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery to make out a new writ of election for the said district.



CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION-EAST QUEEN'S, P.E.I.

Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I have also the honour to inform the House that the Clerk of the House has received from the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery a certificate of the election and return of Donald A. MacKinnon, Esq., for the electoral district of East Queen's, P.E.I.



MEMBER INTRODUCED.

Donald A.: MacKinnon, Esquire, member for the electoral district of East Queen's, P.E.I., introduced by Hon. Sir Louis Davies and Mr. James J. Hughes, King's, P.E.I.



FIRST READINGS.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 118) to amend the Yukon Territory Act and to make further provision for the administration of justice in the said territory.-Hon. Clifford Sifton.
Bill (No. 119) to make certain provisions necessitated by the Demise of the Crown.- Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. CLARKE-by Mr. Taylor-asked :
1.	Who is responsible for the continued delay in issuing forms of application and orders as to the granting of the long service decoration and medal to the militia? .
2.	Will the Minister of Militia state definitely when said orders and forms of application will be issued?
The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. F. W. Borden) :: 1.	There has been no continued delay. The regulations to govern the issue of long service medals are included in the General Orders for March 1st. These General Orders were approved by His Excellency in Council on March 13th. and a certified copy was received on March 16tli, 1901.
2.	Steps are being taken to have the necessary forms printed.


Mr. TARTE.: 



[Stage Direction]
On the question :
1.	What is the reason that the long service medals have not been issued by the Militia Department?
2.	Is it the intention of the hon. the Minister of Militia and Defence to issue them this year?
Hon. Mr. PRIOR.: As this is the same question which has just been asked, and as we have the information, I will drop it.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Dropped.


LIEUT.-COL. VAN WAGNER.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. HUGHES (Victoria)-by Mr. Taylor-asked :
Lieut.-Col. Van Wagner's name is on the list of ' retired officers ' in the Militia List. Why I is not the name found in the ' Reserve of Officers ' list?
The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. F. W. Borden).: Because he was not transferred to the reserve of officers when retired. In explanation of that further, I have this note :
On the 8th May, 1899, Lt.-Col. Wagner i was notified that the general officer com-i manding the militia refused to recommend i an extension of his tenure of command, i and he was also informed that it was the intention of the general officer commanding to recommend that he be transferred to the reserve of officers.
Lt.-Col. Wagner did not resign, and afterwards the general officer commanding recommended that he be retired and his name placed on the retired list. No reasons were given for so doing.


BATTALIONS OF ACTIVE MILITIA IN EACH PROVINCE.
Mr. WALLACE asked :: 1.	What is the number of battalions of active militia in each of the provinces of the Dominion?
2.	What is the arm of the service to which each battalion belongs?
3.	What is the number of men in each?
4.	(a) How many are armed with the Lee-Metford?
(b)	How many with the Martini-Henry?
(c)	How many with the old Snider rifles?
5.	What is the number of rounds of ammunition at present at headquarters of said battalions?
6.	What is the number and description of field guns attached to each battery?
7.	What is the number of rounds available at headquarters of each battery?
8.	(a) What is the number of arsenals in the Dominion?
(b)	Where are such arsenals situated?
(c)	What is the nature and number of rounds in store at each such arsenal?
9.	What is the number of employees engaged and the number of each nationality?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. F. W. Borden).: The hon. gentleman will bear me out in the statement that I discussed this question with him a , few days ago and a modification was agreed

upon. I will answer the question as modified. The following is the answer :
1.
Ontario	43
Quebec	 30
Nova Scotia	 9
New Brunswick	 6
Manitoba	 2
British Columbia	 3
Prince Edward Island	 2
2.	Cavalry, artillery and infantry.
3.
Cavalry	  2,298
Artillery	 3,843
Engineers	 328
Infantry	 29,476
Army service corps	 140
Bearer companies	 344
Field hospitals	 192
4.	(a) Sixty-nine corps are armed with the Lee-Enfield rifles and carbines.
(b)	. None.
(c)	. The remainder with Snider rifles, but in camps they perform their rifle practice with the Lee-Enfield.
5.
Ontario	 6,164,828
Quebec	 4,443,826
Nova Scotia	 232,850
New Brunswick	 318,517


Prince Edward Island ....: 195,540
Manitoba	 181,615
British Columbia	 479,833
<5.
'A' Field Battery, R.C.A	6
' B ' Field Battery, R.C.A	 none
1st Field Battery, Canadian Artillery, Quebec	 6
2nd Field Battery, Canadian Artillery, Ottawa	2
3rd Field Battery, Canadian Artillery, Montreal's	  6
4th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery, Hamilton	 6
5th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery, Kingston, guns, &e., transferred to 'A' Battery	
6th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery.	London	
67th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery,	St. Catharines	68th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery.	Gananoque	
49th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery,	Toronto	
610th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery,	Woodstock	
6lltli Field Battery, Canadian Artillery,	Guelph	
612th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery,	Newcastle	613th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery,	Winnipeg	
614th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery,	(Port Hope) Durham	615th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery,	Shefford	
616th Field Battery, Canadian Artillery, Guelph	
6
Two guns of the 8th Field Battery, Gananoque, are on loan to the 2nd Field Battery, Ottawa.
7.
Ontario	 2,665
Quebec	   708
New Brunswick	   567
Manitoba	 282
8.	(a). One.
(b). Quebec.
(c). Inquiry withdrawn.
9. One hundred and thirty-three, including staff and foremen. I am not able to give the nationalities.


MACAULAY POINT, B.C., CLAIMS.
Hon. Mr. PRIOR asked :: 1.	Is the hon. Minister of Militia and Defence willing to allow the property owners at Macaulay Point, B.C., whose claims for damages owing to the erection of forts at that point were stated by the hon. minister to he inadmissible last session, to take their cases to the Exchequer Court?
2.	Will the hon. minister facilitate such reference to the Exchequer Court as much as possible?
3.	Is it not a fact that similar claims were paid by the Conservative government when in power?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. F. W. Borden).: This is a matter which must be decided by the Justice Department. On the application of any one of those interested I shall be glad to refer the question to the Justice Department for a decision. There were two claims paid on the 28th May, 1892.


MAIL SERVICE BETWEEN MIDLAND AND VASEY.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. BENNETT-by Mr. Taylor-asked :
Is there a daily mail service between Midland and Vasey, Ont.?
If not, when was the same discontinued?
If there has been of late a daily mail service, when was the same commenced, and if now discontinued, why was it so discontinued?
Hon. JAMES SUTHERLAND :: 1.	The mail service between Midland and Vasey was made dally on the 13th October last, and the contractor was called upon to perform the service as increased at the rate which he received for the tri-weekly service, that is, the amount to be paid was to be increased from $119 per annum, which was his contract pay for the tri-weeltly service, to $238 per annum.
2.	On the 1st February last the post office inspector at Toronto reported that the contractor demanded to be paid at the rate of $1 a day or $313 a year, and as he would not abate his demand, instructions issued from the department to reduce the service back to tri-weekly frequency, and to invite

tenders for a dally service from the 1st July next.


ROCKY POINT, P.E.I., BREAKWATER.
Mr. LEFURGEY asked :: Is it the intention of the government to extend and improve .the breakwater or pier at Rocky Point, Prince county, P.E.I., this year?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. J. I. Tarte).: I may say that the question is under serious consideration at the present time.


LOBSTER FISHERY REGULATIONS, P.E.I.
Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Is it the intention of the government to allow lobster fishermen between West Point and Cape Traverse. Prince county, P.E.I., to run their lines and set their traps a few days before the 20th May, in each year, In order that they may be ready for work when the season opens?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. Sir Louis Davies).: No. The order in council fixes the day and hour for the placing or setting of lobster lines and traps in each locality and special privileges cannot be granted the fishermen mentioned in the question.


VOTERS' LIST-KING'S COUNTY, N.B.
Mr. FOWLER asked :: Is the government aware that upwards of 400 names were fraudulently added to the voters' list for the year 1901, in the parish of Rothesay, in the electoral district of King's county, N.B., of persons not entitled to vote in said electoral district in either local or federal elections?


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: The government has no official information of any frauds having taken place in the preparation of the list for King's county. My hon. friend (Mr. Fowler) is aware that the preparation of the list is under the jurisdiction of the provincial authorities, and if any frauds have been committed, I presume and have no doubt that a proper investigation will take place and the parties punished, if there are guilty parties. With regard to the last question, I might tell my hon. friend that the complete list of voters of Kings county,
N.	B., for the year 1901, certified by Geo.
O.	D. Otty, Esq., county secretary, was received by the Clerk of the Crown in Chan' eery on the 24th of December last.


MONTREAL TURNPIKE TRUST.
Mr.  F. D.@: MONK (Jacques Cartier) moved for :
Statement showing the receipts and expenditure of the Montreal Turnpike Trust, and a copy of the annual statement furnished the bondholders of the said corporation by the Montreal Turnpike Trust for the past ten years.
He said : I have already had occasion to offer some observations to the House upon


Mr. SUTHERLAND (Oxford).: this motion. I spoke in French because I wished my remarks to be thoroughly understood by some of the members of this House who come from the part of the country which this motion particularly interests. I am informed that the staff of the French reporters is incomplete to-day, and I shall as briefly as possible finish my observations in English, the more so as I wish particularly to direct the attention of the Minister of Finance to the concluding remarks I have to make on this motion. I mentioned the fact, when this motion was under discussion, that the corporation of the Montreal Turnpike Trust is organized in a way which is altogether repugnant to modern ideas- organized under statutes which date back over half a century, and which are not at all in consonance with such legislation as governs to-day administrative bodies of that description. In fact, as I pointed out the other day, that corporation is entirely administered by certain trustees, a majority of whom represent the creditors of the corporation. These trustees, as the hon. Minister of Finance knows, are elected yearly by the bondholders, that is, the creditors of the corporation. Some officer of the Department of Finance goes down to Montreal in the beginning of February, and there, without taking any cognizance of the state of affairs of the company, or its mode of administration during the past year, but simply representing the Dominion government, the holder of all the bonds of the corporation, names three administrators, who form the majority of the board ; and these names are suggested to him by parties who control the patronage in the district of Montreal. In no sense do they represent the farmers who principally use the roads around Montreal, nor do they represent any other interest than the interest of those who have claims on the corporation.


The MINISTER OF TRADE AND COMMERCE (Hon. Sir Richard Cartwright).: Did I understand my hon. friend to say that the Dominion government are the sole creditors ?


Mr. MONK.: That is, I believe, the case. They have bonds to the extent of $195,000. At any rate, the immense majority of the bonds are owned by the Dominion government, and it is well known that the Dominion government completely control the nomination of the three trustees who form the majority of the board of administration of that corporation. The two remaining trustees are nominated by the Quebec government, and are also. I claim, named irrespective entirely of the interests of the large majority of those who have to use the roads under the control of that corporation. When I tell you thaf of the five trustees who administer the affairs of the corporation, only one, I believe, is identified with the agricultural interests, you will readily realize

that the interests of the farmers, the market gardeners, and all those who largely use those roads, are necessarily neglected. The only trustee who is an agriculturist is Mr. Thomas Trenholme. The others are merchants residing either in the city' of Montreal or outside the city, and. consequently, they have neither that special knowledge which is necessary to a good administration of the great public highways around Montreal, nor are they in a position to realize readily the wants of the farmers nor to inspect as often as they should the highways in question.


Mr. LEMIEUX.: Can the hon. gentleman give the names of the present trustees?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I could not give them all from memory. One is Mr. Gallibere, a well-known merchant of Montreal.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Is there one from St. Laurence ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: There is Mr. St. Pierre, a wood merchant, of Cartierville. But, I maintain that Mr. Trenholme is the only member representing the farmers. If I am incorrect in that statement, I would like my hon. friend to correct me. Now, this is a body which, I think, of all bodies, ought to he constituted under the elective principle which nowadays rules bodies of this kind. As I have pointed out to you, in this case it is the creditors of the corporation who rule' its affairs. I believe that is a great fault ; I believe it is one of the principal causes of the great dissatisfaction which exists in and around Montreal with the administration of that body. I believe it is within the power of this government to correct that fault, and it is advisable that it should be corrected as soon as possible. Another point is this, which it is sufficient for me to indicate to show how very defective this administration is. According to the statutes governing the corporation, they are not obliged in any way to render an account of their administration. This is entirely contrary to all the rules which prevail in the administration of bodies of that kind in the province of Quebec, and, as far as I am aware, in any other province under modern laws. They are not obliged to render an account to the government, nor even to the bondholders, and they are not obliged to publish any statement of their affairs annually. There is no provision in the law which obliges this corporation to call for tenders when executing any of those important public works which, from time to time, become necessary in conection with the improvement of the roads around Montreal. We find at the present moment that the revenues under that system of administration are completely insufficient to enable them to meet their liabilities. As an instance. the government arc well aware that since 1896 not one cent has been paid on


Frederick Debartzch Monk: the indebtedness for interest on the large amount of bonds held by the government ; and what is the reason ? One of the principal reasons, I have no hesitation in saying, is the lack of proper legislation governing the administration. Another reason is the fact that they are obliged, owing to the expansion of the city of Montreal, to establish toll-gates at almost every road corner. At the present moment they are paying, I believe, over $13,000 a year merely for the maintenance of toll gates, for the city of Montreal is stretching out in ail directions. New roads are being opened, new municipalities are being created, and cross roads have to be established : and at every one of these cross roads the Turnpike trustees are obliged to erect what they call a check gate, and place there a toll-keeper, whose office it is to verify the payment of toll by passengers at seme other spot. The more it becomes necessary to establish toll-gates and check gates, the greater the expense becomes ; and in spite of that, they are not in a position, with their present system of administration, to give us either good roads, which we very much require, or the necessary roads. They are obliged to confine themselves strictly to those great arteries which were put under their administration over fifty years ago. and they do not open the roads which become necessary by changed circumstances. I could give you instances of a man going along a newly-opened road of a municipality, one which is not at all under their control, and for crossing one of their highways, being compelled to pay toll. Take this instance of the utter inability of this corporation to meet our wants. At present farmers coming along St. Laurent, from the county of Two Mountains, Laval and Jacques Cartier, are obliged to climb Cote des Neiges, and from the top of the mountain come down a most precipitous hill, which has been invaded lately by the Montreal street railway, with its double track. That descent is most dangerous and difficult, and it would be the easiest thing in the world for this corporation to open a road starting from the St. Laurent road at a given point, which would relieve farmers from the necessity of climbing to the top of the mountain, and which would, without any ascent of any importance, fall into the Cote St. Luc road. The proprietors of land along that projected highway have offered the necessary land, and even volunteered to subscribe money, and to furnish a large quantity of road metal ; yet. we find this corporation unable to do anything. What is the reason they allege ? They say that they have no means, that the interests of the bondholders must be safeguarded. Thus, while the interest is never unpaid, the public are entirely deprived of the facilities to which it is entitled.
Let me give another instance to show how the interests of the bondholders interfere

with the public interest. Before the advent of this government to power, the farmers of the counties surrounding Montreal were given the privilege of return toll tickets, good for the space of forty-eight hours. Why was this privilege granted ? Because such is the condition of the central market of Montreal, that farmers living any distance from the city, are under the painful necessity of leaving their farms about eight o'clock in the evening in order to secure any kind of a place on that market the following morning. They arrive in Montreal at two or 2.30 a.m., and even then are not always able to get a place. On this account the Turnpike Trust thought proper to give them the advantage of a return ticket good for forty-eight hours. That privilege was, however, taken away in 1896, on the ground that the revenue of the trust was insufficient to meet the interest on the bonds. Endeavours have since been made to re-establish that most equitable provision, but in vain.
When any one suggests any change which would have the effect of making the Turnpike Trust Act a little more in accordance with modern ideas, the objection is made that any legislation of that kind must necessarily be accepted by the bondholders or otherwise we would be interfering with vested rights. I therefore ask by this motion for a statement of the affairs of the corporation during the past ten years, so that we may know exactly the facts in the case. While there is no provision in the law obliging the corporation to furnish such a statement, I think the Minister of Finance need only to demand one, and it will be promptly forthcoming. That statement will demonstrate most clearly that it is utterly hopeless for the holders of those bonds, under the present conditions of things and with the growing needs for roads, to expect to be at any time reimbursed the amount due. And when the fact is demonstrated-as it will be by this statement-that this is a bad debt which can never be recovered by this government, I venture to suggest to the Minister of Finance, and the minister who has particular charge of the interests of the agricultural classes, that they should see that communication is had between this government and the provincial government, with the view to a proper reorganization of that corporation, and the Dominion government, upon proof positive that there is no hope for the recovery of the indebtedness, should consent to write it off and enable us to have an institution that will have a proper care for the maintenance of the roads.
I remember the late Prime Minister of Quebec, Mr. Mercier, declaring it was desirable that these toll-gates should be abolished. The thing is easy of realization. You will find no city of the size of Montreal which has such a quantity of toll-gates, meeting at every corner in its vicinity. This js an eye-sore and an inconvenience, not Mr. MONK.
only to residents but to strangers, who ask how it is possible in the neighbourhood of such a large city to have impediments to easy circulation, which are not to be found in the vicinity of American cities or of Toronto.
Our situation is such as should invite the earnest consideration of the government. And if the government find that all hope of the recovery of this indebtedness is gone, they should write it off and allow us to reorganize ourselves properly. We have given large amounts to railways and have helped other public enterprises in a variety of ways. This government collects a great amount of revenue from the city of Montreal, and if the statement of facts I have given be true, this is a motion which should commend iteself to the attention of the government.


Mr. THOMAS FORTIN (Laval).: I have followed the remarks of the hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk), both when he spoke on the 27th of February last, and to-day, with a great deal of interest. As the representative of the county of Laval, I have taken a great interest in the abolishment of toll-gates and toll-bridges. It is well known that the county of Laval is divided into two portions-the old county of Laval, which comprises Isle J6su, and the newer portion made up of five parishes in tile lower end of the Island of Montreal. The old county' of Laval being an island, none of the inhabitants can leave it without crossing a bridge and paying toll, and when they reach the Island of Montreal, they have to pay another toll on the macadamized road. I felt so much interested in this subject, and had for a number of years, that, on two former occasions, when I happened to run as a candidate for the local legislature, this question formed one of the items of my political programme. The first occasion was in 1888. I believe I was the first candidate aspiring to political honours who took up this subject as one of the planks of my political platform. When I ran in 1888, I studied the matter as best I could, and pledged myself, if returned, to do all I could to obtain relief for the inhabitants of that old historic county. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk) was then residing not far from Isle J6su, and he must have been aware that my opponent, Mr. Leblanc, took the opposite view; but, instead of trying to help me upon this question or giving assurance that he would try his best to secure the abolishment of toll-gates, he remained silent. Mr. Leblanc was elected on that issue as much as on any other. I regret that the hon. member for Jacques Cartier did not at that time think as he does now, and come to my rescue


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I was not then in politics.


Thomas Fortin: But, surely, the hon. gentleman was liable to come into politics.

Subsequent events have shown that not only was he an aspirant for political life, but an aspirant for the position of one of the leaders of his party. The second opportunity was in 1S90. There again the same issue was presented to the people. I had the good fortune to bring into the county the late Honors Mereier, who was the Prime Minister of Quebec-, and, in the parish of St. Martin, he pledged his government to abolish tolls on all the bridges and macadamized roads the moment the municipality should take the necessary steps to take over these works and maintain them in proper order. There again Mr. Leblanc, who was returned, fought this as well as the chief planks of my platform. And then the hon. gentleman Mr. Monk, who was not in politics, but who must have been aware of what was going on in the vicinity of Montreal, did not come to my assistance-I presume, because at that time he held the same views as Mr. Leblanc. I say this to show what interest I have taken in the subject, and it will show also to what an extent the inhabitants of the old portion of the constituency I represent are interested in the abolishment of these toll-bridges and toll-gates. It is needless for me to say that I still hold the same views. I sincerely desire that all these impediments, which may have arisen through special circumstances, should be removed. I am in favour of liberty in all its forms, and I like to see a man free to go from one portion of the country to another without Deing obliged to have his purse in his hand to make payments at these toll-gates. But if the hon. member has changed his mind, as I hope he has-for I presume that in 188S and 1890 he was in accord with his political friends- perhaps he will allow me to congratulate him. And perhaps I may be allowed to ask him if he has any plan for the attainment of the object he desires. He seems to have given the subject a great deal of consideration.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fortin) asks me the question, I can only say that I have no definite plan. Even if I had studied the matter for a year and had a plan matured, and the government were not ready, my work would be in vain. And we on this side have too much to do watching the government to work out plans on these subjects. But surely what has been done in every other large city we should be able to do in the city of Montreal.


Thomas Fortin: I accept the statement of the hon. member in the first place, that he has not a plan to suggest. I accept his statement, in the second place, that he has a great deal to do on his side of the House, and that he has not had time to give mature consideration to this subject. I understand that the hon. gentleman has, in fact, undertaken a great task. We have been told by the newspapers representing our opponents
that they had resuscitated the dual leadership system, which was introduced in the 50's, when their party took the name of Liberal-Conservative. At that time, as is well known, one of the chiefs was the chief of the Conservative party of Upper Canada, and the other was the chief of the Liberals of Lower Canada. If I understand aright the nature of the task assumed by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk), he is now supposed to be the chief of the Liberals of the province of Quebec.


Mr. HENDERSON.: I rise to a point of order. I would like to know what this has to do with turnpike roads.


Thomas Fortin: I think I am perfectly in order. I asked a question of the hon. member, which he answered telling- me that he had so much to do that he had no time to consider this subject. I am now dealing with that part of his statement, and it seems to me I may be permitted to say what, to my mind, is the task he has undertaken and what are the obstacles in his way. If I am well informed, the hon. gentleman stands in this peculiar position as regards the work he has undertaken-he is chief of the Liberals of the province of Quebec, as he stands in the place of Sir George Etienne Cartier, when the alliance was "formed with himself as chief of the Liberals.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Will the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fortin) undertake to be guided by me, then ?


Thomas Fortin: We will consider that later on. I wish to point out for the moment how difficult is the hon. gentleman's task. He stands, therefore, as I say, in the position of chief of the Liberals in the province of Quebec with not a single member as a follower. Supposing now the hon. member chooses to say that he stands as chief of the French Conservatives of the province of Quebec. If my impression is correct. there again he has no following, he is not even chief of himself, for he is not a full-bred French Canadian.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I rise to a point of order. This is the last day for motions of this kind, and I know many hon. gentlemen have motions they desire to press. I have made my remarks as short as possible, and to the point. I really think, Mr. Speaker, you ought to insist upon the observation of the rule which requires an hon. member to confine his remarks to the subject under discussion.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I would advise the hon. member for Laval (Mr. Fortin) to confine his remarks as much as possible to the question before the Chair.


Thomas Fortin: I did not propose to go on at any length in that line, and I will now come back to the subject of the motion. I
2o79

fail to see wliat object the hon. member has in view in making this motion. He is not prepared to suggest any plans by which the abolition of these toll-gates might be made an accomplished fact. The hon. gentleman should be aware that this is no place for discussing any such plans, even though any scheme of that kind was feasible. The hon. gentleman knows very well that this is a local matter falling exclusively within the jurisdiction of the legislature of Quebec. He has alluded to the difficulties that his constituents have to overcome in passing over these roads ; he has alluded to the past administration of the .Montreal Turnpike Trust and to the present administration. I was unable to gather from the hon. gentleman's remarks whether he had any particular fault to find with the present administration. I understand that he finds fault mainly with the commission itself. He says that this commission is partly elected and partly appointed by the government of the province of Quebec. That is perfectly true ; but it was true prior to 1897. The present commission was appointed in February, 1897, therefore the system was in existence prior to 1897. Was there any suggestion made at that time to change the system that has obtained since ? No, no suggestion was made when the friends of the hon. member were at the head of that commission. Now that the friends of the present government are entrusted with the powers of that commission, there are, apparently, all kinds of fault to be found. The hon. gentleman has suggested that the present government should abandon its claim as holder of debentures to the extent of $95,000. Well, Sir, knowing what I do of this commission, I join with the hon. member in that advice. I think it is just as well for the government to abandon that claim at once. The interest on it has not been paid since 1895, and is not likely to be paid nt any time in the future. But perhaps the statement made by the hon. member on a former occasion needs to be explained. I gathered from his remarks on a former occasion that he said the interest was paid on these bonds up to 1895. Now, as a matter of fact there was no interest paid for quite a number of years ; no interest was paid in 1895 or 1898. It was a very exceptional occurrence when interest was paid, and the result has been that the present commission had to face a deficit of some $28,000 when they took control of the commission in trust in" 1897.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: My authority was the answer given by the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding), who said that interest had not been paid since 1897.


Thomas Fortin: I am not finding fault with the statement. I say the hon. member left the House under the impression


Thomas Fortin: on a previous occasion that interest had been paid up to 1895.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Up to 1897.


Thomas Fortin: That interest had been paid up to 1897, and none had been paid since ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: That is what I said.


Thomas Fortin: Now, let me draw the attention of the House to the fact that in 1895 a statute was passed in the Quebec legislature which speaks of arrears of interest on several issues of bonds amounting to $187,200. Now, the accrued interest upon that amount had reached the bagatelle of $180,000. It is stated in the preamble of that Bill that no interest had been paid on the sum of $120,000 since the 15th of July, 1881, and that no interest had been paid upon $07,200 since the 5th of July. 1871. Therefore, the hon. member will see that his information was inaccurate when he said that up to 1897 interest had been paid. As a matter of fact, no interest had been paid upon these bonds since 1S81 in the one case, and since 1871 in the other. As I said before, interest was paid for 1895 and 1890 ; but still the commission was left face to face with a deficit, which was admitted by Mr. Mondaux, who was then secretary-treasurer, to amount to $18,000, and which was found upon the special report prepared by an auditor to amount to $28,000. Now, this shows conclusively to my mind that the trust is unable to pay interest on these bonds except by neglecting the roads ; and to that extent I agree with the hon. member when he suggests that the government should give up these bonds entirely. But this would not remedy the evil in any way. These roads go through twenty-seven or twenty-eight municipalities. There are four or five roads. There are two roads that go as far as Lacliine, crossing along the way, all the different municipalities. One road goes through Cote des N&iges, and goes down to Cartierville, through St.-Laurent. Another road leads from Mile End and, goes through several municipalities, the municipality of Villeray and the parish of Sault au Recollet. Another road leaves the eastern portion of the city and goes as far as Point au Trembles, passing through the parish along the way. I think there are altogether twenty-seven or twenty-eight municipalities interested. Now, some of those municipalities have commuted their tolls upon these roads, in other words, have acquired the roads within the limits of their own territory ; others have not. Now, I fail to see how it could be possible to maintain these roads if the government were to give up their bonds. I understand from the hon. member that he does not wish the government to give up their bonds and let the toll-gates remain.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No.


Thomas Fortin: The bon. gentleman, I am sure, only wishes the government to do its share and then to see some other authority abolish the tolls. Now, what municipality will undertake the maintenance of these roads ? This is a matter that requires a great deal of consideration. I may say that the members who compose the trust to-day are just as anxious as any one for the fulfilment of that trust. They render their services without salary, and have no personal interest in the matter whatever. They have no interest whatever in it. They are just as anxious as anybody to see toll-gates removed from the Island of Montreal. But, the subject is full of difficulties of every kind. I think that nothing short of a royal commission, appointed by a special Act of the parliament of Quebec, and given extraordinary powers, can deal effectively with this subject. As it is, there are several municipalities which would not take over the roads if offered them for nothing. I know that an offer was made to the municipality of Point aux Trembles to give up six miles of the road. The receipts upon that road scarcely paid the amount of the salary of the gate-keeper. The municipality would not take it on any consideration. What is the remedy for the trouble ? The hon. member calls for a statement of the receipts and expenditure for the last ten years. What would this amount to ? It is very true the government can get such a statement. A similar request was made before the legislature, and a similar request was granted. It is a public corporation of a mixed nature, and it is bound to give information to any interested party. Any interested party may go there and obtain all these figures. But, since the hon. gentleman has thought proper to bring this subject before the House, it seems to me that he does not discharge his full duty merely in the observations he has made. I expected his conclusion would be the suggestion of a bold plan of some kind by which these obnoxious toll-gates cbuld be removed, and I was very much disappointed that he could not suggest anything to that end. The hon. gentleman has alluded to what was known as the 48-hours ticket, which was sold to the farmers and parties interested, just a short time before this new commission assumed control of the affairs of the trust in 1897. The hon. gentleman knows very well that this 48-hours ticket was nothing but an election dodge, in order to secure votes probably for the hon. gentleman himself, or, for some friends of his party. This meant a loss to the commission of somewhere in the neighbourhood of $4,000 a year, and the hon. gentleman must also know that the receipts have been so much decreased by the establishment of the electric railways and by the introduction of bicycles, and so forth, that they can hardly pay the ordinary
expenditure of the trust and keep the roads in a proper condition. Now, I do not know that the remarks made by the hon. gentleman call for anything more to be said upon the subject. I repeat that I am very anxious to see these toll-gates and toll-bridges totally disappear. There is no portion of the whole province of Quebec where these are more cumbersome than for the inhabitants of the old county of Laval, wherein I reside myself, but I would like to see somebody coming here with a definite scheme by which a proper end could be attained.


Hon. JOHN HAGGART (South Lanark).: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fortin) has found fault with my hon. friend (Mr. Monk) for introducing a motion to find out and inquire what is the amount due by this trust company on the Island of Montreal to the government.


Thomas Fortin: That is not the motion.


John Graham Haggart: He found fault also with the hon. member for Jacques Cartier because, as he said, in some election campaign the hon. member for Jacques Cartier, or his friends, had made an election cry about the abolition of what we look upon in our section of the country as a relic of barbarism-toll-gates. He also found fau:t with my hon. friend because he has not a practical plan by which these toll-gates can be abolished. It seems to me to be the consensus of opinion on both sides of the House that the claim of the government against this trust which has the duty of keeping these roads in order, is worthless. There is $180,000 of interest and $190,000 of capital due to the government, while, with the receipts of the Turnpike Trust, there is no prospect of receiving anything. The hon. gentleman asks for some plan by which these toll-gates can be abolished. I would suggest a plan to him. If he would look to the conduct of the people of New Brunswick and of Nova Scotia, and in some way or other have the claims of these municipalities referred to the Exchequer Court, which would look into the equities of them without any legal formalities to be gone through, perhaps he would be able to get something for the municipalities down there. After all, here is a claim which the government have against this Turnpike Trust, of which there is no probability and no possibility of getting anything. Would not a simple plan be for the government to say to the parties who own these roads :	You
gain nothing out of these roads, but you have to make the expenditure for keeping them in repair. If we forego our claim will you abolish the toll-gates altogether ? If you do not do it, we will enforce our claim to its utmost. There is a simple plan. Then, the hon. gentleman says, that the municipalities will not take charge of these roads. That is a new doctrine. The municipality has to take charge of every road in every


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. AY. S. Fielding).: The motion of the hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) calls for papers which are quite proper, and therefore there is no objection to its passing. I am inclined to think, however, that the remarks that were made by him on this motion were calculated to lead some of us to imagine that the duty of looking after the reads in the province of Quebec belongs to the government of the Dominion. That certainly is not what he would seriously propose, and when he suggests that the government of the Dominion should do this or that in the matter, I am afraid I shall have to remind him that the government of the Dominion are only interested as creditors or bondholders. AVe have nothing to do with the management of provincial roads. Under the Act of Union, certain securities belonging to the provinces passed to the control of the Dominion. Amongst these were claims against this Turnpike Trust : they came under the control of the Dominion, and for some years a portion of the interest was paid. Then, there camp a period of years, owing, no doubt, to the difficulty of maintaining the roads, when the interest was not paid. About the year 1895, I think it was, the claim of the government for principal and interest amounted to upwards of $400,000. It is only fair to say that half of that was for arrears of interest. The capital sum due was about $200,000. A compromise was then come to. which was deemed at that time to be a fair one, whereby half of this claim for principal and interest against the Turnpike Trust was wiped out, and it was agreed that the Dominion should only be a creditor to the extent of $200,000, and at a reduced rate of interest. The Dominion has practically contributed as a free gift $200,000 to this enterprise, and it is now to be asked to give up the balance. I am not going to offer any emphatic opinion now. but, if the Minister of Finance is to be the watch-dog of the treasury, Mr. HAGGART.
I think, perhaps, he may have to be on guard, not only against my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Air. Alonk), but also against my hon. friend from Laval (Mr. Fortin), who seems to be looking in the same direction. I suppose we all agree that it is desirable that toll-gates and toll-roads should be abolished. I had a fad of that kind in my own province, and I take some pride in the fact that the last toll-bridge in Nova Scotia was abolished under my administration, but, it was not abolished by any Dominion grant, but abolished by the' municipal and provincial authorities coming to an understanding and paying off the company, and making it a public highway. I have no desire to say what might be done in the end. The motion of the hon. gentleman (Air. Alonk) calls for information which we shall be glad to furnish. I do not want to admit that the debt is a hopeless one. A Finance Minister never wishes to do that. However, before a proposal is made that the government should give up its claim, I would like to have a clearer understanding as to what is going to happen then. It is well that the House should understand that already the Dominion has given up its claim to the extent, principal and interest, of $200,000 on acount of this trust fund.


Air. GOURLEY.: Has the interest been paid since ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I am glad my hon. friend (Air. Gourley) reminded me of that. After the readjustment took place, it was contemplated that the interest would be paid, and that they would gradually pay off some of the principal. They paid for a year or a year and a half the interest under the rearrangement, and they also paid the sum of $5,000 on the capital. It is represented, however, by the trustees who succeeded the administration of that day. that that amount of $5,000 was not paid out of the earnings of tire road, but was paid practically out of the capital, if I may so express it, because it is said that the roads were allowed to run down, and that when the new trustees came into office they were obliged to make good the defects, and that therefore, the earnings of the roads did not justify the payment of the $5,000. Of course, I only give that as a statement of the trustees, for I have no personal knowledge of the matter. After paying interest for a year or two on the readjusted sum, the payment ceased, and for the last couple of years no interest has been received. As to the capacity of the trustees.
I have no reason to doubt that they are very estimable gentlemen. I believe that under the late administration, the chairman of the trustees was an excellent newspaper man, and a man who is capable of running a successful newspaper can generally do pretty nearly everything on earth. The gentleman who is now the chairman of the trustees is a merchant of high standing in

the city of Montreal, and I have no doubt that the trustees are doing the best they can to administer the trust. I suppose that the real trouble is that the demands for the maintenance of the road are so great that it is difficult to meet th*e payments of interest and to maintain the roads.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I desire to thank the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding) for the statement he has made. I understood from his remarks that the matter was a proper one to bring before this House, and that
Copies of all leases, contracts or agreements for the rental of all buildings now occupied, or to be erected for and occupied by the Federal-government in the city of Ottawa.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Hon.  E. G.@: PRIOR (Victoria, B.C.) moved for :
Copies of all specifications and plans issued
he would be ready to lend himself to an by the Department of Marine and Fisheries when investigation of the financial ability of this calling for tenders -for the construction of two cnmnrntion to nav its debt But I cannot , government vessels in British Columbia. Also corporation to pay its a ID .	>
J . copies of all tenders received for construction
say as much foi my hon. friend foi Lava) oJ samei together with a statement showing the (Mr. Fortin). I thought he would give me anlount of the deposits made by the several ten-a very hearty support ; but, he seems to derers, &c., names of the successful tenderers, blame me for not coming down to this , and all correspondence and papers connected House-which he admits has no jurisdiction with the same, including that in connection with in the matter-and take -up an hour and a i the withdrawal of one of the successful ten-half explaining about the maintenance ot' ! ders-
'	' ' The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W.
S. Fielding). Stand.


Edward Gawler Prior: This is the second time this has been asked to stand.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The Mmthese roads. What has he got to say about that ? Why cannot he corroborate what I have said about the financial standing of this corporation ? The matter began in 1888, and he has been looking into it for fourteen years, but he has not to-day any plan . of any kind whatever to suggest. I ister of Marine is absent, but the last inthink the House will be satisfied with the formation I had was, that the contract had statements made by the Minister of Finance, not been awarded.
and by the hon. member for Lanark (Hon.
Mr. Haggart). It is a thing that is feasible, since it has been done everywhere else, and when we have the assurance of the government, that upon proper proof that; well, this is a worthless asset, they will leave us free to arrange this matter.
Hon. Mr. PRIOR, That is three weeks ago. Better let the motion drop.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Very
Motion dropped.


CANAL BRIDGE AT COTE ST. PAUL.
[Stage Direction]
Mr, F. D. MONK (Jacques Cartier) moved for :
The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I did not give any such assurance.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: 
Frederick Debartzch Monk: As this is the last day for
motions of this kind, I would ask the gov eminent to permit the Order paper to be gone through so as to pass the unopposed motions.


The MINISTER OF TRADE AND COMMERCE.: 
Mr. THOS. BIRKETT (Ottawa).: In moving the motion which is in my name, am I to understand that there is no discussion allowed on it ?


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: There is no discussion at this stage.


Thomas Birkett: Then discussion, for :
the duty of the government, while constructing the canal for the general wants of the Dominion, to supply wherever necessary proper means of communication from one bank of the canal to the other. As I have stated, the bridge at Cote St. Paul is too weak to admit of electric cars passing over it; and I understand that it is too narrow I move, without t when open to admit of the free and easy | passage of A'essels coming down the canal..

I am informed that the Bohemian, coming down the canal, at that point, touches on both sides. But the chief inconvenience is the want of proper communication between the city of Montreal and the town of Cote St. Paul a,nd the municipality of Verdun. It is impossible for the Montreal Street Railway to cross, because the bridge would require to carry thirteen tons, whereas I believe it has only sufficient strength to carry seven tons. So that the street cars only run as far as the bridge. There is no doubt that if they could cross jhe bridge and run as far as Verdun, where the line already reaches, and pass by a circuit back to Montreal, the greatest possible advantage would result to Cote St. Paul, Verdun and the city of Montreal itself. I believe that the people of Cote St. Paul and vicinity have communicated with the government on this Subject on one or two occasions; and at their request I have called at the canal office at Montreal and solicited from the resident engineer there, Mr. Marceau, the favour of an estimate of what a new and enlarged bridge would cost. I have not been able to obtain that information in time for this motion; but I would invite the earnest consideration of the Minister of Railways to this subject. I believe it is admitted now that a tunnel under the canal would be very much better than a bridge over the canal. I believe that was established in some way at the time the difficulties arose in connection with the construction of the Curran bridge. This is a particularly favourable spot for the building of a tunnel, for the land is low on both sides, and I do not think the tunnelling would be expensive. Under these circumstances I would ask the Minister of Railways to give his. earnest attention to this request.


Thomas Fortin: I happen to know something about the bridge in question, and about the wants of the town of St. Paul in connection with it, and I entirely concur in the demand made by the hon. member who has just taken his seat. The town of St. Paul is a very progressive locality. A few years ago it formed part of the parish of St. Paul; then it became a village, and afterwards a town. There are various industries in operation within its limits, and altogether it is a very considerable and progressive place. To my personal knowledge-for I have been for the last ten or twelve years the legal adviser of the municipality-it has lately made an agreement with the Montreal Street Railway Company, by which for the next thirty years at least it is to have electric communication with the city of Montreal through the town of St. Henri. In order to have that communication, the cars must pass over this bridge; but the bridge is so old and weak that it actually fell down during last winter. It was repaired, and it may be strong Mr. MONK.
enough for ordinary vehicles, but it is certainly not strong enough for electric cars to pass over it. This is a place where the Lachine canal crosses a public highway, and it seems to me "that the government are bound to restore communication between the opposite sides of the canal, so that a continuous highway may be there as it was before. Perhaps somebody may say, if the bridge is strong enough for ordinary vehicles, that is all that is required; but I submit that when a government or a railway corporation cuts up a highway, it is bound to replace it with a highway equally strong and solid, whether by a bridge or a tunnel. The arrangement with the Montreal Street Railway Company has just been completed. There is still a small matter of detail to be arranged between the parish of St. Paul and the Montreal Turnpike Trust, for a portion of the road in question is controlled by the Turnpike Trust. All these arrangements are made at considerable sacrifice by the people of the town of St. Paul, and it seems to me that it is only fair and proper that the government should take the necessary steps either to provide a bridge of sufficient solidity to carry electric cars, or to build a tunnel, as suggested by the hon. member for Jacques Cartier.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr.  F. D.@: MONK (Jacques Cartier) moved for :
Copies of all correspondence, telegrams and messages In the Government Labour Bureau between the department and all persons, referring to the labour strike at Valleyfield, in Beau-harnois county, province of Quebec, during the month jif November last; also copies of all letters, telegrams and messages exchanged between the Militia Department and the municipal authorities at Valleyfield, or any justices of the peace, the military authorities at Montreal or any other persons relating to the said strike, and the calling out or payment of the troops in connection therewith; also a statement showing expenses incurred by the Dominion government in reference to said strike.
He said :	In making this motion, I wish
to make a brief statement to the House ; and if the facts which I am about to state are found to be true, as I have no doubt they would be on investigation, they reveal a state of affairs which I think calls for public condemnation. Briefly, the facts are these. Last spring an association was formed in the town of Valleyfield bearing the name of ' L'Union Liberale.' The object was to protect workingmen by seeing that their rights were on all occasions properly vindicated. But as the name savoured a little too much of politics, it was changed to that of ' L'Union OuvriSre,' ' the workingmen's union.' Its president was a man by the name of Etienne Leger, the vicepresident and treasurer was one Joseph

Dezy-two prominent Liberals of that locality-and the secretary, the deus ex machina, or the principal factor in the worx of organization, was Louis Bertrand, who was lockmaster on the Beauharnois canal. All the workingmen of Valleyfield were cordially invited to join such a beneficial association and encourage the work of protecting the labouring man. Assurances were given that there would be no politics in the society, and that its sole object was the obtaining of better wages and the protection of the rights of labour. An initiation fee of' one dollar was charged, and a monthly subscription of 25 cents.
The municipal council of Valleyfield is largely composed of Liberals. In fact, I believe that only one or two of its members belong to the true political faith. At that time, this corporation was having some work done, and it was understood that preference would be given to those who belonged to this society. If a Conservative applied for work, he was told that it was a great misfortune, but he must abide the results of his political creed or else join the association and become a Liberal. I am even very credibly informed that this man Deschene was in the habit of swearing men who joined the association that they would join the Liberal party. The municipal corporation was only paying one dollar per day to its workmen ; and as it was deemed necessary to show that this association was existing to some practical purpose, a resolution was passed to the effect that circumstances having changed, an increase of 25 cents should be given to the corporation workmen, and a demand to that effect was made upon the municipal council and at once acceded to-which of course showed what power this society had.
The Montreal Cotton Mills Company, which has very extensive and valuable works at Valleyfield, had purchased some property from the Buntin estate, on which it intended erecting thereon some buildings, and was employing labour deepening the foundations. These men were not cotton mill employees proper, but were simply employed by the day at current prices. This special work was being done when the election campaign began, and the men doing it were all voters. The association urged these special workmen to ask for higher wages. Deschene went to see Mr. Lacey, the manager of the company, and presented him with a demand for increased pay. Mr. Lacey replied that the wages were sufficient, and as the season was pretty far advanced, he suspended this special work. On the other hand, a certain number of men who were employed by the year by the Montreal Cotton Mills Company, were at that moment engaged loading coal or conveying coal to the mills, and the association succeeded in persuading them, and indeed the workmen generally engaged in the mills, to go on strike for an increase. The company has a property there valued at $2,600,000, and fears were entertained that it might suffer damage, and at this juncture, Mr. J. N. GreenshieMs arrived on the scene and succeeded in obtaining from the mayor of the municipality, Mr. Langevin, a Conservative, and from Mr. St. Onge, the Liberal member of that municipality, the necessary demand for military protection. Having obtained that demand upon the assurance that it was a mere formality, and that these two councillors would not suffer, he applied for military protection on behalf of the company. But when the troops arrived nobody could be found to read the Riot Act. The mayor was confined to his house, and the other councillor denied having taken any part in the summoning of tiie military force, and the recorder of the place, Mr. Papineau, joined with the rioters.
The House is aware of what happened. Nobody being there to read the Riot Act, a certain number of the soldiers were ill-treated, were stoned, and the minister who has charge of the Department of Labour, the Postmaster General, was asked to send some one down to put an end to this strike, which had been altogether brought about by the action of the three men who conducted the affairs of this so-called society. In answer to the demand which was made upon him, the minister gave as an excuse that his engagements would not allow him to intervene personally; but he sent down an employee of his department connected with the labour bureau, a Mr. King, if I am not mistaken


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, Mr. King, the Deputy Minister of Labour.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Mr. King came down to Valleyfield. As I understand it, the function of Mr. King, and his duty under such circumstances, is indicated by a law which we passed last session-03-64 Victoria, chap. 24, section 5 :
It shall be the duty of the conciliator to promote conditions favourable to a settlement by endeavouring to ally distrust, to remove causes of friction, to promote good feeling, to restore confidence, and to encourage the parties to come together and themselves effect a settlement, and also to promote agreements between employers and employees with a view to the submission of differences to conciliation or arbitration before resorting to strikes or lock-outs.
Though that is the duty of Mr. King under the circumstances, I am credibly informed that he did the very opposite. He became a political agent. He met the leading people in Valleyfield and told them the government were prepared to do a great deal for the success of this strike, but it was all-important that they should support Mr. Loy,

who was the Liberal candidate. So, Mr. King became when there an active canvasser. The information which I have given to the House as briefly as possible has been given to me by reliable people. If this statement as to the state of affairs is true, it is clear that the conduct of the parties I have named in connection with the matter is much to be condemned. I submit also that it goes a long way to maintain the claim which has been put forth by several parties at Yalleyfield, that this strike, and what subsequently happened, was organized solely and purely for political purposes. If that is true, it would be extremely unjust that the cost of sending the militia should fall upon the municipality. It should be paid by the government, who allowed this state of affairs to exist-


Hon. Mr. SUTHERLAND.: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk) has made a serious charge agaiust a very prominent official. Would he give me the name of one or more piominent persons who said that Mr. King, to the shghtest extent, took part in politics 1


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I have that statement from my informants.


James Sutherland: This is a very serious charge. And the hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk) must know that, coming from him as a prominent lawyer and a prominent member of the House, it cannot fail to attract attention. He should be prepared to take the responsibility of it or give us the names of his informants.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I shall be happy to do more than that, and to give affidavits of perfectly responsible men, to the effect that the facts as I have stated them are true. I shall give those affidavits in the early part of next week. I have no personal knowledge of the facts, but would not have made the statements without having information on which I could rely. As to the effect upon the election, we have the fact that, whereas in 189b, the Conservative candidate in that constituency, Mr. Bergeron, had a majority, if I am not mistaken, of 105 in Yalleyfield and Ste. Cecile-both places united, and generally considered as one-in consequence of this movement to obtain his defeat, he was burled there under a minority o ' 312. I think I am not mistaken in that. Thus, the cause mentioned in the House the other day for the defeat of the Conservative candidate in Beauharnois county-mentioned by my hon. friend from Bonaventure (Mr. Ma'reil)- is not the real cause, but. that cause was in reality the special condition of affairs in the town of Valleyfield. I see that the hon. Minister of Public Works (Hon. Mr. Tartei has taken a great interest in the statement I have made. I believe that this movement was got up, to a very large extent, for the purpose of favouring his own candidature in that county. He will remember that some pressure was brought to bear upon Mr. MONK.
him to go there as candidate, and a strong movement was made to secure bis election there. At that time, with parties who were going to Montreal to secure the candidature of Montreal, there was no question of Mr. Loy's candidature. I think it is very important that the facts should be ascertained; and if any official in the department has been guilty of the conduct which I have stated to the House, I think the House should take cognizance of the facts.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. J. Israel Tarte).: Mr. Speaker, the town of Valleyfield-I would rather say the city of Valleyfield-has to-day a population of 12,000. In 1898, the town bad a population of 5,000 or 6,000. It has become a centre of great industry and activity. The Montreal Cotton Mills Company own, probably, the largest mills in Canada. They are a strong, powerful, enterprising cor-portion. They bought the Buntin property, and undertook to lay the foundations for a new addition to their mill. It was late in the fall ; the weather was cold- in fact, it rained, I suppose, two or three days a week. The men, who were working in the water to the belt, were being paid *?1 a day. They thought they were not being paid enough, and I think they were right. I am not here to justify any strike, or any organization for striking purposes ; I state the facts as I know them to be. In Valleyfield, as elsewhere iu the district of Montreal, the workingmen formed an organization. Now, I am very sorry that my hon. friend (Mr. Monk) has received so much wrong information. I happen to know what is going on in the county of Beauharnois, and I have followed this very affair with great care. This was not a Liberal association, it was a workingmen's association, and I make bold to say that the majority of its members belonged to the' Conservative party. The workingmen of both political parties were members of that association. The men made up their minds that they were not paid enough, and they went on strike. Whether they were right or whether they were wrong, it is not for me-to judge. Their associates, the men engaged in the ordinary work of the mill, sympathized strongly with them, and went on strike also.
If my hon. friend knew more about the state of affairs in Valleyfield. he would know very well that nearly every one working in the mills is a Conservative. I am sorry to have to state that the management of the Valleyfield mills have systematically excluded friends of this government from employment. I cannot be accused of any revengeful spirit against the owners of those' mills. The hon. gentleman lias alluded to my candidature in 1896, when I was defeated by a small majority. Why was I defeated, Mr. Speaker ? Because there was a most shameful pressure brought to hear

upon the workingmen, and I was a witness of it. Electors wTere even locked up in the mills on the day of polling. I make that statement because I was a witness of what took place. But I forgot and forgave everything. I think, perhaps, if I had been disposed, I could have found means to take revenge. But I forgave everything, because I am not such a small-minded man as to take revenge on a large industry because its management have not done the right thing by me. I make that statement just to show that my hon. friend is wrongly informed. The Liberals have no show in the Yalleyfleld mills to-day, they are only employed when nobody else can be found.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Why did the Liberal candidate have so large a majority ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Because the people changed their minds in Yalleyfleld, as they have done everywhere in the province of Quebec. Now, my hon. friend made some very strong statements. For instance, he stated on his responsibility that the recorder of Yalleyfleld, Mr. Papi-neau, joined the rioters. That is a very strong statement to make.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I did not say that. [DOT]


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, word for word. ' Joined the rioters,' I took down the words.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I never said he joined the rioters. I said he sympathized with them, and refused to read the Riot Act.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I do not want to be unfair to my hon. friend, but he will read those words to-morrow in the ' Hansard,' those very words, ' He joined the rioters.' Now, Sir, if Mr. Papineau or other responsible parties in Valleyfield had read the Riot Act, what would have been the consequence ? The soldiers who had been called there would simply have shot down honest workingmen. But would my hon. friend be ready to stand up in this House and say that the recorder of Valley-field did not do the right thing ? Soldiers should not be asked on such occasions to shoot down citizens, even though those citizens are not doing what is right. There was no loss of property in Valleyfield, and no riot; yet under those circumstances my hon. friend would insinuate that the recorder of Valleyfield was wrong in refusing to read an Act, the consequences of which would have been simply the murder of honest citizens, I call it murder.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: My hon. friend will pardon me. I said he sympathized with the rioters and refused to afford sufficient protection to the militia that had been called there. But I did not say that he was bound to cause the murder of honest workingmen.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend knows very well what would 82
have been the consequence if Mr. Papineau, or the mayor, or any other man, had read the Riot Act, the soldiers would have been obliged to fire.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No, that is not the law.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It might have meant that, at any rate. But nothing of the kind happened, and peace was restored. Now, my hon. friend should not try to place the responsibility of what took place on any other shoulders than those who were really responsible. I say that if the owners of the Yalleyfleld mills had not forgotten that they were bound to pay honest wages to honest labourers, nothing of the kind would have happened. Sir, here is a great, powerful, and wealthy corporation which is earning large dividends, larger perhaps than we know, larger than we have been told. Was it fair for them to exact from labouring men, in the month of October to work in water up to their waists, ten hours a day, for the paltry wages of $1 a day ? I say without hesitation, and the country will agree with me, that the workingmen were not being treated fairly at Valleyfield. I do not say they did right in going on strike, I think they could have arranged matters without having recourse to the proceedings that they adopted. But upon that point I am not going to judge. My hon. friend says that the council of Valleyfield is Liberal, but he was immediately obliged to admit that the mayor was one of his political friends, and it was the mayor himself who, without consulting the council, signed the very document by virtue of which the troops were called out.


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: Was there any destruction of property 1


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, there was no destruction of property, and there was no loss of life, because the Riot Act was not read. Now, I am very much surprised to hear my hon. friend state that he had received information to the effect that Mr. King, the able Deputy Minister of Labour, went there and canvassed for the hon. member for Beauhar-nois (Mr. Loy). My hon. friend has undertaken to produce the evidence in support of what he says. If he produces such evidence, we will be unanimous in condemning Mr. King ; but before such evidence is produced, I am bound to believe that my hon. *friend has been misled in a very serious manner indeed. The name of Mr. Green-shields has been mentioned. Mr. Green-shields is the lawyer of the Dominion Cotton Mills Company, and acting in that capacity he applied for troops. But Mr. Greenshields happens to be a Liberal, and my hon. friend, who is a shrewd man, mentions his name just to associate him with the affair. He mentioned my name in connection with this affair, and said
r



that he forgot the dates. My hon. friend was far away in his own riding, and he forgot the dates.	The
candidature of the member for Beau-harnois had not been accepted when the trouble took place. I was asked to be a candidate there, but I was better engaged in St. Mary. Well, the electorate was not very inattentive to the explanations that I offered. There was no question of party in this affair, none whatever. I know very well that the late member for Beauharnois tried his level best to make the electors believe that he was the saviour of the workingmen. But he had told them so many things that did not turn out to be true, that they did not take much stock in what he said. He did not defeat me in 1896. I would have been elected by a couple of hundred majority if the electorate had been free as it was last November. On this last occasion the electorate of Valleyfield was free, and it is a great blessing indeed for the electorate to be free, both in civil and religious matters. The Liberal party has at least achieved that great object of giving civil aud religious freedom to the electorate of this country. The electors were free in Valleyfield because this year the management of the mills was not altogether the same. Mr. Simpson had gone. He had followed me with the men of the mills in 1896 from polling place to polling place, and these men were yelling against me in every parish and in every corner of the riding. The same state of affairs did not take place this year. The electors voted freely, and it is because they voted freely that my hon. friend (Mr. Loy), and old Conservative like myself

Soit dit en passant- has been elected in that riding. My hon. friend (Mr. Monk) has alluded to the fact that a change took place in that constituency. My hon. friend (Mr. Loy), who sits in this parliament in place of the old member whom very very few will regret, was a Conservative. He belonged to the great Conservative party of past days. He changed his mind, and with him the thriving and intelligent town of Valleyfield changed its mind also.


Mr. A. W. PUTTEE (Winnipeg).: I am glad that these papers have at last been moved for, but I regret that the motion should have been deferred to such a late date in the session. A reference to the Order paper will show that the notice was given nearly six weeks ago, and I was anxious before, and have been anxious ever since, that this matter should be discussed, and that the people of Valleyfield and the people throughout Canada who are interested should get to know the facts of this case. The mover of the resolution (Mr. Monk) has given a version of the case, which, although I am not prepared at this moment to contradict, most certainly disagrees very materialy with my own knowl-


Joseph Israël Tarte: edge of some of the facts, and disagrees with the representations which have been brought before me. I know nothing at all about a political labour organization having been organized in Valleyfield last spring. It may be so and it may not. I do not know. I do know that there is in Valleyfield, and there has been for some time, a duly organized Federal Labour Union chartered by the Trades Congress of Canada. That is an organization that cannot take part in party politics. It is neither their policy nor their business so to do. It is there for purely trade union purposes to look after the interests of the workers as regards their labour, and until this afternoon I had always heard that the Valleyfield Federal Labour Union had kept strictly to the work for which it was chartered. But, Mr. Speaker, I am led to believe that this serious trouble that occurred just before the elections was the result of political machinations. I do not care which party it is that is interested, whether it is both parties or only one, we want to know the facts as to that. The matter was so very serious that if it is true that the strike was the outcome of party politics at that time, in order to influence the election, and if it resulted in the strike and the calling out of the militia on account of which a riot occurred, then some one must be held to account. From information which I think is to hand, if it can be proved that these statements are right, then there are some persons who are guilty of conspiracy in this case, and the matter should be thoroughly inquired into. I would call your attention, Mr. Speaker, to the fact that some thirteen or fourteen men were arrested and have been returned for trial, and that their trial is being postponed and held over. I am perfectly sure that if the things that are inferentially charged against other parties were charged against these men, they would have been tried for conspiracy long before this time. As to the right of the men to strike, I do not know that that is a matter that concerns us at the present time. The Minister of Public Works (Hon. Mr. Tarte) has told us that the men were working in a cellar digging waist deep in water for a dollar a day, and he will not express any opinion as to whether they were justified in striking or not. Well, Mr. Speaker, for my part, I am glad they did strike. If business was good in Valleyfield at that time, and if these men were working ten hours a day for a dollar under the conditions stated ; surely, there was nothing to cause a riot or to call out the militia because they refused to work for that wage.
Now, the Deputy Minister of Labour was called to Valleyfield at that time, and in his report to the department there is this fact brought out: That there was a small strike

there, and that not for any necessary reasons, but on the solicitation practically of the Cotton Company of that town, the militia were called out. There has never been any evidence that there was any need to call the militia out.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Hear, hear.


Arthur W. Puttee: The militia were taken to Valleyfield, and we have in the report of the Deputy Minister of Labour the fact stated plainly, that the large strike of the cotton operators of that city ensued because the militia had been called there.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Hear, hear.


Arthur W. Puttee: Now, I am proud of these men that they did strike when the militia were called out there to intimidate a few other men who had quit work because they were not satisfied with the terms that were offered them. I would remind the House that just before this we had another case in British Columbia where the militia were called out to take a hand in settling a strike. I am prepared, Mr. Speaker, to give, not only my endorsation, but my praise to the men of Valleyfield who had no complaint themselves, who were getting the work and wages they contracted for, but who threw up their work, laid down their tools and walked out of the factory and said : We will not work while the militia are in town. I may state, Mr. Speaker-and this, it seems to me, throws the weight a little more on my side than perhaps on the other in the argument, that if there is any one to blame for working this trouble for political purposes, it is not the working people-I may state that the settlement that was made at that time by the Deputy Minister of Labour has not proved satisfactory, because it has not been thoroughly observed. During the last few weeks there has been a deputation to Ottawa, and we have waited on the Deputy Minister of Labour, and we have tried to find out what were the points in that settlement, and why men have not been taken back to work who were included in the settlement at that time. I hope that the government will speedily bring these papers down, that we shall get all the evidence that can be got, and that if necessary we shall have a full investigation into all the facts of the case.


James Sutherland: I did not happen to be in the House when the hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk) began to speak to his motion, but when I did come in I heard him using some very strong language with regard to the young gentleman who is acting as Deputy Minister of Labour ; who Is a young man of excellent qualifications, a man of the very highest character, and one who, as a young 821
Canadian, is likely to make his mark in the civil service, or in any position in which he may he placed. I am informed, and have every reason to believe that there is not one iota of foundation for the most serious charges that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk) has made against that young man. I do hope that for his own credit and for the credit of this House, that when the hon. gentleman finds out that he has been misled and misinformed, he will be the first one to stand up and do justice to a gentleman who has been so improperly dealt with. If, on the other hand, he can produce-as he said, in reply to my question, he could-the affidavit of any responsible person that there is the slightest truth in the statement he made to the House, I will be the first to take action to see that justice is dealt out in the matter, and I believe I will be endorsed by the House in that. I fear that the hon. gentleman has been imposed upon, because I believe there is not the slightest foundation for the charges or for the statements that were made with regard to Mr. King, the Deputy Minister of Labour. In regard to the case that has been discussed, I do not desire to say anything further than that I agree with the hon. member for Winnipeg (Mr. Puttee), that, so far as we do know the circumstances, the strike was brought about by the calling out of the militia. There were no party politics in the matter at all so far as we could learn.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There have been strikes before; this was not the first.


James Sutherland: Yes, and the threatened strike at the present time. There is this to be said to the credit of Mr. King, that he did what he could to bring about a better understanding between the employers and the employed, and succeeded. We all know that this is a new department which lias arisen out of the desire on the part of the government and on the part of parliament to do what they can towards allaying the difficulties that arise from time to time between the employers and the employed, between what is very often referred to as capital and labour. Whether this establishment of a Bureau of Labour will be altogether successful or not, I do not know, but I believe that hon. members on both sides of the House are actuated by a desire to do what they can to assist this Bureau of Labour in bringing about a better feeling between the employers and employed. In this particular case it must be a source of gratification to the people of this country, and to the members of this House to know, that, at the very moment when bloodshed was almost threatened, when there were so many men out of employment, and when the destruction of property was feared, the intervention of a third

party, of Mr. King, resulted at once in settling the disturbance and allaying the bad feeling which existed. Whatever feeling there may be in regard to that disturbance, this is a result for which everybody must be thankful. In this particular case we have the reward of the effort that was made on behalf of the labouring classes of this country in the fact, that, as a result of the visit of Mr. King, the men at once returned to work and an amicable settlement was brought about between the two parties. Upon reading the news of that day, we did not know at what moment most serious results might occur in Valleyfield. I only got up to draw attention to the very strong statements that the hon. gentleman made, and I think it is due that he should either verify these statements or withdraw them.


Mr. H. J. LOGAN (Cumberland).: Mr. Speaker, I think this discussion will be of considerable benefit if it draws the attention of the country to two phases of the labour question. One is in reference to the Conciliation Bill which was passed by this House last session. I agree with the hon. member for Winnipeg (Mr. Puttee), that if the statement is correct, and I presume it is, when it is made by a minister in this House, if these men at Valleyfield were asked to work belt-deep in water for one dollar a day, it is sufficient justification, and the only reason I desire to know, that they should strike, and that the sympathy of the country should be with them. This is a growing time, particularly in the cotton trade of this country. The cotton manufacturers have no reason to complain of the treatment of the hon. Minister of Public Works (Mr. Tarte), even although he may have been almost justified in wreaking a little vengeance upon them. He used them in a magnanimous way, and it is not to their credit that he is able to make the statement in this House to-day, that after the way they have been used, touching the tariff, they are compelling men to work for the miserable sum of one dollar a day. What I arose particularly to refer to was the Conciliation Bill and the good effect of that Bill. Mr. King went to Valleyfield and the result was that the strike was settled, t have had some experience myself in reference to conciliation measures in my own constituency, and I know that in a place where they had nine or ten strikes in as many years, since the formation of the conciliation board there by their own accord three or four years ago, we have not had friction between capital and labour. I think this Bill will have a good effect if used properly in this country. I regret we cannot have compulsory arbitration, because it is outside of the jurisdiction of this House to pass such legislation. If it were within our jurisdiction, I think we would not be equal to our duty if we did not pass such legislation. But. we Mr. SUTHERLAND.
must make the best of what we have in this Conciliation Bill. The second point brought out was the calling out of the militia when this labour difficulty commenced. It seems to me that this should be the very last resort. Men who strike for better wages have to consider a number of serious matters before they quit work. They have to consider the question of the maintenance of their wives and children. It must be supposed that when they quit work and demand better wages there are very serious reasons why they should do so, and it should be the last resort that the militia should be called out, because it is nearly always certain to result in bloodshed, in riots, in the destruction of property and in loss of life. I desire to join my testimony to that of the hon. acting Postmaster General (Hon. Mr. Sutherland), in reference to Mr. King the Deputy Minister of Labour. Mr. King is one of the leading economical authorities of this country. He is a young man who was taken by the authorities of Harvard University, who know a good man when they find him, and was sent by them to study economical questions on the other side of the water. 'He had a position waiting him in Harvard University at a large salary as soon as he completed his studies on the other side of the water. He has spent some years on the continent of Europe and in England studying these questions, and he had this position open to him when he desired to return. The hon. Minister of Labour (Hon. Mr. Muloek) asked him to take charge of the Labour Bureau in this country. He left the position at Harvard to come back to serve his own country, and I am proud to say that we have this young Canadian, who is such a high authority on economical questions, as Deputy Minister of Labour in Canada. With regard to my hon. friend the member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk), I feel confident, knowing Mr. King as I do, that he has been misinformed, and I know that the hon. gentleman will be the first, when he finds that he has been misinformed, to express his regret that he has made such statements.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. F. W. Borden).: Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to continue the debate from the point of view from which it has been carried on:	I do not understand from the
hon. mover (Mr. Monk), or from any other speaker, that any exception has been taken to the manner in which the officers of the Militia Department discharged their duty. My hon. friend from Cumberland (Mr. Logan) has referred to the undesirability of calling out the militia on the occasion of strikes. Without offering any opinion upon that point, I have simply to say what I think is well known to every hon. member of this House, and to everybody in the country, that there is a provision in the Militia Act by which, on a complaint, or on

a request from the civil authorities-in this case it was the mayor of the town-when a requisition is made to call out the militia, the militia must be called out. There is no alternative, the matter is not referred to the Militia Department here. Automatically the militia responds; it is called out upon a requisition made by the civil authorities. That is exactly what has happened in this case, and I do not think any exception is taken to the action of the militia officers or the department. I have only to add that there is no objection to bringing down all the papers so far as I know, and I shall be happy to see that they are laid on the Table of the House at the earliest possible moment.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I have only a word or two to say in reference to some remarks that have been made here to-day. My hon. friend the acting Postmaster General (Hon. Mr. Sutherland), was not in the House when I opened my remarks. I stated that what I was giving to the House had been given to me by a reliable person. I have no personal knowledge of these facts whatever, and when we are having some provisions of the Conciliation Act, which is scarcely a year old, applied, I say that a man who has information which he deems reliable on a matter of public interest is quite justified in calling the attention of the House to that information; and I find that 1 have been justified by my hon. friend from Winnipeg (Mr. Puttee), who more particularly represents the labour interests. I have given to the House a plain statement of facts, and from the excitement which the Minister of Public Works displayed, I am inclined to believe there is really more in my statement than I at first thought. The Minister of Public Works has depicted to us men working up to their waists in water ; but did he hear me make the statement to the House that a certain number of men were employed digging foundations, that application was made on their behalf by parties I have named for an increase of wages, and that Mr. Lacey, the manager of those cotton works, as I understand, declared that the season was too far advanced to give an increase, and stopped the work? Does the Minister of Public Works deny that ? He does not, because he does not know anything about it.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: I do know all about it.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Does he deny that the work was stopped by Mr. Lacey on the ground that the season was too far advanced ?


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: The reason assigned by Mr. Lacey was the one my hon. friend has given to the House; but before there was a strike or any demand for an increase of wages, that gentleman never thought of stopping the work.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: But we have this much admitted, that the strike had not developed. Mr. Lacey returned, he saw trouble in the future, the season was advanced, and he stopped the work. Therefore, the men working in the water up to their waists, referred to so often by the Minister of Public Works, were not the men whose fate was in question in this strike ; but it was the o-dinary employees of the company who were employed in conveying coal into the mills. It was upon them that pressure was brought to bear.


Arthur W. Puttee: Would the hon. gentleman allow me to explain ? I do not think he understands it quite rightly. The strike did occur through the men who were working on the foundation works asking for more wages ; and after the strike occurred, when the question of a settlement came up, the manager of the company said he would not settle it, because he would not go on with the work anyway.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: Hear, hear.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: At that time there had been no call for the militia. What I say is that the incident there had been finished when further trouble arose, provoked by the men whom I have named ; and it was then that they brought pressure to bear on those working in the coal-not those working up to their waists in water ; and it was explained how Mr. Greenshields had the militia called out.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: The Dominion Cotton Mills Company had the militia called out.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It was Mr. Greenshields who applied to the government for the militia.


The PRIME MINISTER.: No, not to the government.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: He got this requisition signed under the circumstances I have stated, and conveyed it to the government.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Not at all. We never heard of it.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: To the commanding officer in Montreal.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I do not wish to misstate any of the facts. I have no personal knowledge of them.


The MINISTER OP RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: The government had no more to do with it than the hon. member himself.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: My hon. friend must know
that the statement made by the Minister i of Militia is absolutely correct; the gov-eminent have no discretion whatever, for I once the requisition is in the hands of the

military authorities, the soldiers must go out. The formality was accomplished, and the commanding officer was obliged to go.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: As an act of administration, the Militia Department had nothing whatever to do with this. As a matter of fact, the minister knew nothing whatever about it.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I quite understand that. It would be the greatest folly to stand up and condemn the government for having the militia called out, and if I name Mr. Greenshields, it is because he was counsel of the company.


Mr. BRITTON.: Why did the hon. gentleman say that somebody carried something to the government ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: My hon. friend will please excuse me. I know what the Militia Act requires, and I do not suppose that any one in this House will understand me as stating that the government sent the militia. It would be too absurd, and I do not believe anybody in the province of Quebec would accept such a statement. But what happened ? The strike ceased the moment the election was over. My opinion is that the whole bottom dropped out of the thing, and I think the hon. member for Winnipeg is right when he says that they have not been satisfied with the operation of this Conciliation Act. The Minister of Public Works may say what he likes, but in 1896 the vote was very different from what it was in 1900 ; and there is no doubt whatever, whether the Conservative candidate or the Liberal candidate was to blame, that the circumstances of the strike were such that they were responsible for that great change. As regards Mr. King, I gave the information to the House, and I intend seeing that affidavits are put into the hands of the government to the effect that he did use his position to advance the interests of the Liberal candidate. Textually my opinion is this, that he stated to a number of people there that there was justice in the demand for an increase of wages, but that unquestionably the success of that demand would be greatly assured if everybody would vote for Mr. Loy. It is on that fact that I intend producing evidence. Is that true or is it false ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: It is false.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Who states it ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: A number of people in the county.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Does the hon. gentleman think it is a fair thing to take a statement like that against a reputable government officer, when he has not the evidence to prove it ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: 


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I make the statement, and I intend to procure the proof ; and if I cannot procure the proof of it, I shall be most happy to say that I have been misinformed. I may say I have heard this from a candidate in the local election, or something of the kind ; but I will investigate, and if I find that that statement is not well founded, I will with pleasure withdraw it. I think that under the circumstances, and having received that information from several parties, I was quite justified in moving for this correspondence and calling the attention of the government to the fact that it would be unjust, if any of these statements were true, to call upon the militia to go to the town of Valleyfield. And I find it somewhat singular that the gentleman far more interested in this motion than I-I refer to the representative of that county himself-is not here to bear out the statement made with respect to him by the hon. the Minister of Public Works.


The PRIME MINISTER.: The last words of my hon. friend who has just spoken convey an insinuation upon the hon. member for Beauharnois (Mr. Loy) which is absolutely unwarranted, and which the House will resent. It is true that the hon. member for Beauharnois is not here this afternoon, but he has been here on other occasions when this motion was called, and when the mover was not in his seat to move it. Again and again, at least five or six times, was this motion called, and my hon. friend (Mr. Monk) was not in his place, but the hon. member for Beauharnois was, and it is not fair to insinuate, that because he does not happen to be here on this particular afternoon, when the hon. gentleman finds it convenient to be present, that he is in bad faith.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I saw him here yesterday.


The PRIME MINISTER.: My hon. friend saw many members here yesterday who are not here to-day. It was not worthy of him to make such an insinuation against the hon. member for Beauharnois, who, I am sure, would be only too glad to be present to give his version of the facts. And if the hon. member for Beauharnois were here, he would give his opinion on another aspersion which my hon. friend cast on another gentleman, Mr. King, the Deputy Minister of Labour, and who, of course, cannot be present to reply. Mr. King has been Deputy Minister of Labour for the past seven or eight months, and been called, not only to Beauharnois, but to many other places, even as far as British Columbia, to settle labour disputes, and this is the very first time that I have heard the slightest insinuation cast against his character or manner of doing business. I know to my certain knowledge that some time ago he was called on to proceed to Oshawa and Whitby

to settle some labour trouble. An election had taken place shortly before, and political feeling was running pretty high, but .Vir. King discharged his duty, not only to the satisfaction of the workingmen, but also of the employers, who, I understand, belong to the Conservative persuasion. So, in British Columbia, and everywhere else he has been, he has discharged his duties in the most satisfactory manner, and been particularly careful not to lay himself open to any charges or aspersions arising out of politics. This is the first accusation made against Mr. King. My hon. friend was within his rights in moving for this return, and I quite approve of his having done so, but, he would have followed a better course if he had not taken the opportunity to assail the character of a man who is not here to defend himself.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I do not know whose character I assailed.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Mr. King.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I simply made a statement.


Mr. RALPH SMITH (Vancouver).: I was sorry, Mr. Speaker, not to have been here when the hon. gentleman moved his motion. I agree entirely in the resolution under discussion. There is sufficient evidence in our hands, as representatives of labour, from the men affected by this trouble, to prove the absolute necessity of having all the correspondence put before the House. To that extent I agree entirely with the mover of the resolution.
I can assure the House that the settlement of that dispute has not been by any means satisfactory, but, in saying this, I do not mean to insinuate at all that Mr. King, the Deputy Minister of Labour, was at all to blame. I am happy to be able to say that in all the correspondence I have had on this matter, it has never been Insinuated that he used his influence for political purposes. The first time I ever heard such a charge made was this afternoon on the floor of this House. None of the labourers of that district who have written to me-and I have had a good deal of correspondence with them-have insinuated that there was any political connection between the gentleman who went down to effect the settlement and the trouble itself. The settlement itself, however, was anything but satisfactory. 1 am informed that the employers of labour made certain promises, made practically a certain contract with the Deputy Minister of Labour, and there is no doubt at all that they have not carried out that contract ; and if there is one thing which the government ought to see to, it is that both employers and employees should be compelled, as far as possible, to carry out their agreement. I would be just as strict with the employees as with the employers. If the labouring men agreed to certain conditions, or came to a certain understanding with the deputy minister, whose business it is to make a settlement, and did not carry out that understanding, ,1 would be one of the first to censure them, and I take the same position with regard to the employers. There is no doubt at all that the promises made by the employers to Mr. King have not been carried out, and the government should enter into correspondence with these employers, and give them to understand that they have to keep up their bargain, and use every pressure to compel them to live up to it.
With regard to the calling out of the militia, I know that the government legally is not to blame, but it is altogether too easy a thing in this country for the militia to be called out in time of trouble. The very fact of sending the militia to the scene of trouble is sufficient in itself to provoke an extension and aggravation of the difficulty, and, consequently, it ought not to be by any means so easy to have the militia called out as it is at present. If I were working for wages and had trouble with my employers, I would not care for the militia. If my position was a correct one, I do not consider that they could injure it. But what I do say is this, that, generally speaking, the bringing of militia to the ground in troubles of this kind excites provocation, and some change ought to be made which would make the calling out of the militia a more difficult matter, and prevent the recurrence of such scenes as were witnessed at Valleyfield.
It will certainly be more satisfactory to have all the correspondence brought down, so as to put the House in possession of the facts.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I have listened, Mr. Speaker, with great pleasure to this discussion, and am glad it has broadened out beyond the mere lines of the order. I come from a county whose peoplei are largely of the working class. The chief town of my county, Truro, is filled with a body of intelligent mechanics. And if I may take the mechanics of my county, as a type of the mechanics of Canada, I can confidently say, that disturbances of this character would never occur, if the men were accorded proper treatment. The question of the position of labour is the great question for Canada to-day. I am not a labour agitator, but I say, that we in this parliament should dignify and ennoble the discussion of these questions and show the workingmen of this country, that they have the true sympathy of the best men of Canada, in an endeavour to secure for themselves fair-play. And if the workingmen feel that they have the sympathy of the parliament of this country, there will be no disgraceful strikes of this kind within our borders. The labour question should be so dealt with here, that the workingmen shall understand that this question is regarded

;as among the most important that can come before this parliament. The workingmen .and mechanics form the great middle class [DOT]of this country. The foundations of our manhood and integrity as a nation rest upon this great middle class ; and if they are not well paid and well housed, if they are hot satisfied, our country can never have the strength that it ought to have. I hold that the whole labouring population of Canada are underpaid. Let me give one illustration. I have a neighbour living near me in my town. He gets $1.25 a day, and he has sis little children. Under the public policy of this country, these children must attend the public schools ; where they meet children who are much better off than they are. They must dress decently, or they are made to feel at the very inception of their lives, that they are scorned and condemned by their better-off neighbours. A mechanic who has but $1.25 per day, cannot maintain, feed and clothe his family as he would like to do ; he cannot maintain his family, in decency, in honour and respect, on such wages. We must make up our minds, to influence the whole public opinion of Canada, and to bring that opinion to bear upon capital, in favour of1 a general increase of wages. We have our public schools, and these and other institutions have created, I believe, higher ideals among our workmen and mechanics, than characterize a similar class, anywhere else in the world. Then, we must follow out logically and properly this state of affairs which we have established, and furnish these men with wages that will enable them to live as they should.
I wish to say one word to the hon. Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair). He has in my town a staff of workmen and mechanics that would do credit to any employer of labour. I do not wish to be a demagogue-and I think he will understand that-for already I think he has attempted to ameliorate the conditions of these men by increasing their wages, but most inadequately. At the same time, in this growing period of which we have heard so much, and with the increased revenue of the Intercolonial Railway, for I would not have made this application five years ago. recognizing that the Intercolonial was then somewhat of a burden upon the country, but to-day, since that great system has become a source of revenue to the Dominion- the improvement of the condition of these men should engage his serious attention. The workmen and mechanics employed on the Intercolonial Railway-and there are Liberals and Conservatives among them, 1 speak for all-are a splendid body of men. Cannot the hon. minister scale up the wages of these efficient and trusty men ? there are no more trustworthy men in the world. When the members of this House, leave for Easter recess, the lives of many of them Mr. GOURLEY.
will be in the keeping of these faithful men. I want these men to be remembered, and I hope the minister will find it in his power to increase their wages at an early day. In a number of the associations in my county, and in the province of Nova Scotia, they are passing resolutions and working out figures, to show, that they are not paid, as highly, as are men in similar occupations, in other countries. I have not the data to speak upon that subject myself ; but when the time comes, and this subject is presented to him more in detail by myself and others, I hope the hon. minister will deal generously with the employees of the Intercolonial Railway, and especially with those in the county of Colchester and the town of Truro.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the motion :
That, in the opinion of this House, the time has arrived when the best interests of Canada demand that the government should without further delay introduce a Bill embodying a workable scheme looking to the granting of adequate retiring pensions to the officers, non-commissioned officers and men of the permanent corps of the militia of Canada.
Hon.  E. G.@: PRIOR (Victoria, B.C.) As it [DOT]is impossible for me to do justice to this matter in the ten minutes between now and the time arranged for adjournment, and as this is the last day when the matter can come up, I ask that the motion be dropped.
Motion dropped.


PREFERENTIAL TARIFF-DIRECT IMPORTATION.
[Stage Direction]
On the motion :
That, in the opinion of this House, the preferential tariff should only apply to goods brought into Canada through Canadian sea-ports.
ilr. H. J. LOGAN (Cumberland). Like the hon. member for Victoria, B.C. (Hon. Mr. Prior), I cannot do justice to the subject of my motion in the few minutes remaining before six o'clock. I shall be obliged to let the motion go over, with the intention of bringing it up again at the first opportunity.
The PRIME MINISTER.: Stand.
Motion allowed to stand.


FINANCIAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL STATUS OF THE NORTH-WEST TERRITORIES.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. WALTER SCOTT (West Assiniboia) moved for :
Return showing copies of all memorials, replies thereto and correspondence between the government of the North-west Territories and any member thereof, and the government of Canada and any member thereof, on the sub-
[Stage Direction]
ject ol the financial and constitutional status of the said North-west Territories.
He said : I placed this notice on the Order paper early in the session, but have had no opportunity to discuss it. But, as it seemed probable that we should not reach this motion I took advantage of the opportunity afforded by the debate on the budget to bring the matter to the attention of the House and to speak upon it at some length. Therefore it will not be necessary for me to go into the subject on this occasion.
Motion agreed to.

Mr.  W. M.@: GERMAN (.Welland) moved for :
Return showing : The number of leases of water power granted on the Welland canal and feeder; the names of the lessees; the quantity of power granted in each lease, and the location of such power; the consideration named in each lease, and the length of the term granted; the names of the present holders; the amount of consideration in arrears, if any, on each lease, and the number of years during which such arrears have been accumulating .
He said ; I would have been glad to have Sfioken at some length on this motion; but, as the hour is drawing near at which hon. gentlemen desire that the House should adjourn, I shall not speak longer than until six o'clock. The motion is one which I regard as a proper motion, and the information which will be given In the return brought down in response to it will be found very valuable and important information. The water powers of the Welland canal have been used very largely for years by our opponents as a political machine. Leases of water power were granted for years for nominal sums to political partisans. There are perpetual water powers there which are worth from $50,000 to $75,000 which people are not using at all. There is one water power on the Welland canal embracing three locks, giving a maximum of 1,500 horse power, used at a rental of $250 a year; and one lock of about 000 horse power is sold for $300 a year, being $50 a year more than the total price which these people are paying, and they are holding out the balance for a price of $75,000. The Libster Cotton Mills have been offered, I am told, $20,000 to $30,000 for this power. They are not using it themselves and they will not allow anybody else to use it. There are other powers existing on the Welland canal, water is being used which is not being paid for, and water is being used at a price very often far less than the value of the power which is granted. The whole matter should be looked into carefully by the government, either by a commission or in some other way. The whole system of water power on the Welland canal should
be so regulated as best to meet the exigencies and needs of the people. Power at the present day is a very valuable asset, and is worth looking after. The whole Welland canal might be a hive of industry, with industries very much larger than those now existing there. Let measures be taken so that this power could be utilized for purposes beneficial to the citizens. I believe that the government should take hold of the matter in a businesslike way and deal with it as business men would deal with an asset that belonged to them. There is here a valuable asset to this country, and I hope the government will take hold of the matter and deal with it as a business concern would deal with it. As it is now six o'clock, I will say no more, but move the resolution.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
on motion of the Prime Minister, House adjourned at 6 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, April 9, 1901.