Mr. L. N. CHAMPAGNE (Wright) (Translation.) moved :: That the first report of the Select Standing Committee appointed to supervise the official report of the Debates of the House be now concurred in.


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: (Translation.) What does the report contain?


Louis Napoléon Champagne: (Translation.) The report the adoption of which I move recommends that the quorum of the committee be reduced from eight to five members.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) moved :: That the report of the special committee appointed to report the lists of members to compose the select standing committees of this House be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) moved :: That a select committee composed of Messrs. Borden (Halifax), Bourassa, Brock, Casgrain, Clancy, Clarke, Davies (Sir Louis), Flint, Fraser, Ileyd, Hyman, Johnston (Lambton), Laurier (Sir Wilfrid), Monk, Roche (Marquette), Scott and Wade, be appointed to assist Mr. Speaker in the direction of the Library of Parliament so far as the interests of this House are concerned, and to act as members of a joint committee of both Houses on the Library.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) moved :: That a Message be ordered to be sent to the Senate informing their Honours that this House will unite with them in the formation of a joint committee of both Houses on the subject of the printing of parliament, and that the members of the Select Standing Committee on Printing, viz. :-Messrs. Bennett, Casgrain, Clarke, Davis, Holmes, Hughes (Victoria), Hyman, Johnston (Cape Breton), Johnston_ (Lambton), LaRiviSre, Lavergne, Loy, Maclean, McColl, Marcil (Bona-venture), Oliver, Parmelee, Prefont aine, Richardson (Grey), Scott, Sutherland (Oxford), Taylor, Thompson and Tisdale, will act as members on the part of this House on said Joint Committee on the Printing of Parliament.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

The MINISTER OP FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: I beg to lay on the table the report of the Auditor General for the year ending June 30, 1900.


Mr. WALLACE.: What date ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: For the year ending June 30, 1900; with various notes and comments of a later date.


Nathaniel Clarke Wallace: I thought it would be up to the 14th of February.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The correspondence is up to a very recent date.



RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT.

Mr. EDWARD  A.@: LANCASTER (Lincoln and Niagara), moved the first reading of Bill (No. 4) to amend ' The Railway Act.' He said : This Bill relates to the liability of the railway company, in case cattle guards are not kept at highway crossings. At present, the law is that if an animal is at liberty, not controlled by a human being, and gets upon the railway from the highway, even though there is no cattle guard, the company is not liable. The object of the Bill is to make the company liable to keep up cattle guards, on the theory that these guards are needed for the purpose of preventing animals from being killed or injured when they are not in charge of a human being. If the animal is under the control of a human being, cattle guards are not necessary, because the human being will see to it that the animal is kept out of danger.


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

Sir CHARLES HIBBERT TUPPER.: Before we proceed to the Orders of the Day, I would like, for one moment, to call the attention of the House to certain facts connected with the distribution of the Auditor General's Report which was laid on the table a moment ago. Technically, the report cannot be considered before parliament until it is laid on the table. But from the morning papers it is quite clear that the press must have received a copy of this report yesterday ; and to-day, having seen a reference to the Auditor General's Report in a morning paper, I sent, both to the distribution office of this House and to the post office, to obtain a copy. I was informed through a page that the reports were ready and in the possession of the post office of the House, but they could not be distributed to the members, nor could I obtain a copy until the report was laid upon the table of the House. Now, while that may be technically right, there Sir WILFRID LAURIER.
seems to me to be no reason why that rule should not be broken in favour of a member of parliament as well as of a member of the press. I do not in the slightest begrudge the press who have received a copy, but it is as straight a violation of any rule as would be handing it to a member, on application, in the House. I certainly think that the members of the House should receive this public document at least as soon as the members of the press.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: My hon. friend's point seems to me well taken. But I really cannot give him any explanation of how that document was given to the press. I can only say that yesterday afternoon, very soon after the adjournment of the House, the Auditor General sent the report to my office. It had been his purpose to lay it on the table during the afternoon if the House had continued in session, but owing to the early adjournment he was not able to do so. I was as much surprised as my hon. friend when I saw some statement attributed to the Auditor General's Report appearing in a morning paper. I am afraid I will have to look elsewhere for information as to how it was obtained, for I have no knowledge of it. I think the hon. gentleman's point is well taken.


Mr. MACLEAN.: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I wish to say that if the House is moved into supply, I will not go on with the motion of which I have given notice, for the reason that there is a large number of members who wish to take part in that discussion, and they are away from the House to-day. But I let my notice of motion stand.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think that is no reason why government business should be delayed, although of course we would be glad to discuss the hon. gentleman's motion. I move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee of Supply.


Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).: I thought the understanding was that we should not proceed with supply to-day for the reason that the Auditor General's Report is not in possession of the members of the House, even at the present time. I have not received a copy of it, nor have the hon. gentlemen around me.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Of course I understood in our conversation on the subject yesterday that a portion of the afternoon would have been occupied by the motion of my hon. friend from East York (Mr. Maclean), who has now laid it aside for another day. I supposed, moreover, that the Auditor General's Report would be on the table, if not in the hands of the members, for some time before the motion of supply was made. But if my hon.

friend, the leader of the opposition (Mr. Borden), thinks it would not be convenient to go on with supply, under these circumstances, and as I think there is a fair room for his criticism, 1 will not press the motion.
On motion of the Prime Minister, House adjourned at 3.20 p.m.

Monday, February 18, 1901.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Three o'clock.



REPORT PRESENTED.

[Stage Direction]
Annual Report of the Department of Railways and Canals for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1900.-Hon. A. G. Blair.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 5) to restrict the . importation and employment of Aliens.-Mr. Clare.


Mr. HACKETT asked :: 1.	Were tenders invited during the year 1900 for building an extension to Tignish breakwater, Prince County, P.E.I. ?
2.	In what newspapers were the notices calling for tenders inserted, with dates of publication and length of time between insertion of notice and date when tenders were received and opened by department?
3.	How many tenders were received, with names and addresses of parties tendering and amounts of their respective tenders ?
4.	Name and address of person to whom contract was awarded, and amount of same ?
5.	When is the work to be completed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. J. I. Tarte) :: 1.	Yes.
2.	Charlottetown Patriot, Charlottetown Guardian, Charlottetown Prince Edward Islander, Summerside Pioneer, Ottawa Free Press, Ottawa Le Temps, Bryson Ottawa Valley Advocate. Tenders called on June 29, to be opened on July 20, 1900.
3.	One, J. H. Myrick & Co., of Tignish.
4.	J. H. Myrick & Co. for $4,255.75.
5.	To be completed on or before October 31, 1901.



WINNIPEG LETTER CARRIERS.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaRIVIERE asked :
1.	Has the following petition been received by the Hon. the Postmaster General :
Winnipeg, Manitoba.
To the Hon, Wm. Mulock,
H.M. Postmaster General.
We, the letter carriers of the city of Winnipeg, respectfully beg leave to request that the present scale of salaries now paid us be considered and revised.
That owing to the continued prosperity of the Dominion during the past six years, the cost of living has been very much increased and wages in all other branches of labour have advanced accordingly.
Also, the reduction in postage rates, together with the expanding trade of the country, has increased the work of our branch of the postal service.
We submit from experience that the increased cost of rents, clothing and provisions generally have absorbed all our earnings, thereby adding largely to the difficulty of maintaining ourselves and families with any degree of respectability.
We respectfully call your attention to the wide difference between the pay of letter carriers and that of other public employees of this city, while the duties performed by us are much more onerous and exacting, and make much greater demands upon our intelligence, honesty and physical endurance than that of civic employees generally.
We also submit that we are the only class of public servants debarred from participating in the growing time, and we therefore ask that 20 per cent be added to present salaries so as to enable us to live with some degree of domestic comfort.
Therefore, your petitioners pray that you may be pleased to take early steps towards the granting of this our reasonable request.
2.	Is it the intention of the government to accede to the legitimate request of the petitioners?
Tbe MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Slfton).: Yes, and is receiving the consideration of the department.



SOUTH AFRICAN WAR-OPINION OF THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT.

Mr. BOURASSA asked :: 1.	Was the Canadian government or any of its members consulted by the British government on the South African question since the 1st of June last?
2.	Did the Canadian government or any of its members offer any opinion or make any suggestion to the British government on the matter?


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: The Canadian government was not consulted, nor was any of its members, by the British government on the South African question since June 1 last. No member of the Canadian government offered any opinion on the matter.



SOUTH AFRICAN WAR-THE BADEN-POWELL POLICE FORCE,,

Mr. BOURASSA asked :: 1.	Is it true that some Canadian officers are engaged, or are going to be engaged, at recruiting men for the Baden-Powell police force?
2.	Who are they?
3.	Are th6y paid for that work by the Canadian government ?
4.	What is their pay or salary?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. F. W. Borden) :: 1.	Yes.
2.	Officers of the headquarters staff, certain district officers commanding, certain officers of the North-west Mounted Police, and probably the services of other officers will be required. The only officers not in permanent employment so far detailed are Capt. F. W. L. Moore, 4th Regt. Canadian Artillery, and 2nd Lieut. G. S. Beer, Nelson Rifle Company.
3.	No.
4.	No pay or salary has been arranged for. An officer is entitled to the pay of his rank While employed.



OPERATION OF TICKET-OF-LEAVE ACT.

[Stage Direction]
Mr! LaRIVIERE asked :
1.	How many convicts have been conditionally liberated from each of the various penitentiaries, jails and prisons in Canada under * The Tlcket-cf-Leave Act ' ?
2.	How many have since been re-arrested and re-convicted for the same or other offences?
The SOLICITOR GENERAL (Hon. Charles Fitzpatrick) :: 1.	Kingston, 55 ; St. Vincent de Paul, 54 ; Dorchester, 35 ; New Westminster, 9 ; Stony Mountain, 6 ; Central prison, Toronto, 28 ; Montreal jail, 9 ; Aylmer jail, 1 ; Sorel jail, 1 ; Halifax County jail, 1 ; New Westminster jail, 1; Regina jail, 1 ; Nelson jail, 1 ; Quebec jail, 1; Penetangui-shene reformatory, 1 ; Dawson jail, 1; Andrew reformatory. 1 ; Ottawa jail, 1 ; over 208.
2.	So far as the Department of Justice is aware, seven have since been re-arrested and re-convicted for a similar or other offences.



ADVANCES MADE TO SETTLERS IN MANITOBA.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaRIVIERE asked :
Is it the intention of the government to reduce the rate of interest on the unpaid balance of the loans and advances made to the settlers in Manitoba in about the year 1876, as was done in the case of the Mennonites?
The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: I beg to say that the subject to which the hon. gentleman refers is under consideration at the present time. No definite decision has been arrived at. I hope to be able to say more upon the subject before the session is over.



MANUFACTURE OF BINDER TWINE BY THE GOVERNMENT.

Mr. BLAIN asked :: To whom was the binder twine, manufactured by the government, sold in 1900? At what price was the binder twine, manufactured by the government, sold in 1900? What was the cost of raw material and manufacture of binder twine in 1900?


Mr. BOURASSA.: 


The SOLICITOR GENERAL (Hon. Charles Fitzpatrick).: As I presume this question refers to the operation of the twine industry during the fiscal year ending June 30 last, my hon. friend will find the answer to the information he asks for at pages M-46, 47 and 48 of the Auditor General's Report. As to the last branch of the question, it has not been the custom nor the policy of the government, since the inception of the binder twine industry, to give the cost of the raw material until such time as the product has been marketed for the season.



PAYMENTS TO GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY COMPANY.

Mr. MONK asked :: 1.	What was the total amount contributed by the present government to the reconstruction of the Victoria bridge at Montreal?
2.	What is the amount paid annually by the government for the use of the Victoria bridge by the Government railway?
3.	What is the amount paid annually by the government for the use of the Grand Trunk Railway from Ste. Rosalie to St. Lambert, for the government railway?
4.	What is the amount paid annually by the government for the use made by the Intercolonial Railway of the Grand Trunk Railway terminal facilities at Montreal?
5.	Is there anything in the conditions of the grants or arrangements above referred to between the government and the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada which restricts the latter from making its shipping port at Portland, to the exclusion of Montreal?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Blair):: 1.	The total amount contributed by the present government towards the reconstruction of the Victoria bridge at Montreal was $500,000.
2.	The amount paid annually by the government for the use of the Victoria bridge by the government railway is $40,000.
3.	The amount paid annually by the government for the use of the Grand Trunk Railway from Ste. Rosalie to St. Lambert for the government railway is $37,000.
4.	The amount paid annually by the government for the use of the Grand Trunk Railway terminal facilities at Montreal is $62,500.
5.	There is nothing in the conditions of the grants or arrangements above referred to between the government and the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada which restricts the latter from making a shipping port of Portland.



HYDRAULIC MINING LEASES.

Charles Hibbert Tupper: Referring to the list of hydraulic mining leases on p. 55, Annual Report of the Department of the Interior, 1900-
(o) What is the date of each lease?
(6) What conditions or terms, if any, of these leases respectively have been complied with?
109	FEBRUARY 18, 1901	HO
(e) What conditions or terms, it any, of these leases respectively have not been complied with?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: Mr. Speaker, I will have to ask the hon. gentleman (Sir Charles Hibbert Tupper) to move for a return for the information he is asking for. I cannot satisfactorily or intelligently give it in answer to a question.



ST. CATHARINES, ONT., WATER SUPPLY.

['Tuesday, February 19, 1901.']
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: Mr. Speaker, I cannot inform the hon. gentleman (Mr. Lancaster) if the report distributed of my speech on that occasion is accurate or not. I presume, however, it is substantially correct. The question to which it refers is now undergoing the consideration of the government.



Mr. ROBINSON (West Elgin) asked :: 1.	Did the government either give or promise to give the sum of $3,200 per mile to the Lake Erie and Detroit River Railway extension, and if so, why?
2.	Is the government aware of the fact that the said Lake Erie and Detroit River Railway extension runs parallel with and very near to the Michigan Central Railway for about three-fourths of its length?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Blair) :: 1.	Yes ; the government not only promised to give the subsidy, but has entered into a contract with the Lake Brie and Detroit River Railway Company for the payment of a subsidy to them on completion of the line in accordance therewith.
2.	Yes ; the government is aware of the fact that, for a limited number of miles, the Lake Erie and Detroit River Railway extension does run parallel, or very nearly, to the Michigan Central Railway. This fact was made the subject of discussion in parliament at the time the subsidy proposal
was being passed upon. The government, in the Bill providing for this subsidy, reserved the question of the grant for determination, after inquiry, by the Railway Committee of the Privy Council, as to whether adequate and efficient running powers should be arranged for by the Lake Erie and Detroit River Railway over the Michigan Central line. An objection was taken in parliament by gentlemen in opposition to such qualifying clause being introduced, and it was insisted that the grant should be made without any qualification whatever. This view was pressed strongly, and a motion in amendment was made to strike out the qualifying clause ; it was lost on a division. The Railway Committee of the Privy Council subsequently heard evidence upon the whole question, examined into it carefully, and came to the conclusion that satisfactory arrangements could not be made over the Michigan Central Railway for the running of the Lake Erie and Detroit River trains.


HON. CHARLES BURPEE.
Mr. WILMOT (by Mr, Fowler) asked :: 1.	What is the date of Hon. Charles Burpee's appointment to the Senate?
2.	Is he now a member of that body? If not, why, and when did he resign?
3.	In the event of his resignation, was he given a position of emolument under government? If so, what were the duties of the office and the amount of remuneration?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE (Hon. Sydney A. Fisher).: Hon. Charles Burpee was appointed senator on February 1, 1900. He resigned on July 19, 1900. He was appointed one of the Paris exhibition commissioners on August 9, 1900. He did not go to Paris. His salary was the same as that of the other commissioners, being at the rate of $2,500 per year, with an allowance of $3.50 a day while in Canada and absent from his residence, and actual transportation expenses.


POSTMASTER AT BRANDON, MAN.
Mr. BOYD asked :: 1.	Is Mr. James Kavanagh now postmaster at Brandon, Man.? If not, did he resign or was
he dismissed?
2.	How many years did Mr. Kavanagh act as postmaster at Brandon?
3.	Was an investigation held by the post office authorities prior to his removal?
4.	Who is now postmaster at Brandon, and what is the date of his appointment?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: In the absence of the Postmaster General (Hon. Mr. Mulock). I beg to say :
1.	Mr. J. C. Kavanagh is not now postmaster of Brandon, Manitoba. He has



been removed from the postmastership of that office.
2.	Mr. Kavanagh had been postmaster of Brandon since August, 1881.
3.	In view of the representations made in the matter, a post office investigation was not considered necessary.
4.	Mr. Kenneth Campbell is now postmaster of Brandon. He was appointed on December 24 last.


AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT.
Mr. CLARKE asked :: At what date was the first instalment of * MS.' of the Auditor General's Report for last fiscal year sent to the government printing office?
Has all the * MS.' of the report been sent in to the government printing office?
At what date was the last instalment of copy sent to the government printing office?


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) :: 1- September 11, 1900.
2.	Yes ; the report is presented.
3.	February 6, 1901.


APPOINTMENT OF MR. LIONEL DANSEREAU TO HOUSE OF COMMONS STAFF.
Mr. TAYLOR (by Mr. Clarke) asked :: 1.	Has a Mr. Dansereau been appointed to a position on the staff of the House of Commons?
2.	If so, what are the duties of the office?
3.	What is the salary attached?
4.	Is Mr. Dansereau a son of the editor of La Presse newspaper ?


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) :: 1.	Mr. Lionel Dansereau has been appointed assistant clerk of French journals, to fill the vacancy caused by the demise of the late Mr. G. I. Barthe.
2.	His duties are to assist the clerk of French journals in the translation of the journals and the appendices.
3.	Salary to be fixed by Mr. Speaker and the Board of Internal Economy.
4.	Mr. Lionel Dansereau is a son of Mr. A. Dansereau, of Montreal.


CONTRACT WITH KINGSTON LOCOMOTIVE WORKS.
Sir CHARLES IIIBBERT TUPPER asked :: 1.	Is the correspondence between Hon. James Sutherland and Hon. William Harty set out in the following poster (used in the recent general election in Kingston, Ont.), authentic?
2.	If yes, what is the date of the order in council referred to in the telegram from Hon. James Sutherland to Hon. William Harty of November 5, 1900 ?
3.	What the terms of the order in council (briefly stated)?
4.	Was any formal contract, based on the said correspondence, entered into? If so, when?
5.	What are the terms of such contract (briefly I
stated)?	I


Mr. SIFTON.: Locomotive Works Bought-Hon. Wm. Harty is Kingston's Friend-Has Orders for Thirty-two Locomotives-Twenty for the Government and Twelve for Mackenzie & Mann-Where was the Conservative Help for the City on this Occasion-Read the Government's Contract Below and Thank Liberals for Redeeming a Big Industry.
The correspondence closing the order: Kingston, November 3, 1900.-Hon. James Sutherland, acting Minister of Railways and Canals, Woodstock :	Dear Sir,

I expect to be possessor of
the locomotive works in this city on Monday next. I now beg to offer you as follows :	I
will build (20) twenty locomotive engines for the Intercolonial Railway upon any specification the officials of that railway may furnish me, and will guarantee the engines as being as good in every respect as you can buy from any other builder. In order to settle the question of price and to ensure the work being done by Canadian workmen, I will guarantee to make the price per engine $500 less than you can import the same from any foreign locomotive engine builder. Kindly let me have your order by wire. Yours sincerely, (Sgd.) Wm. Harty.
Montreal, November 5,	1900.-Hon. James
Sutherland, Woodstock, Ont.-Arrived here this morning, Windsor Hotel, will be here all day. Please answer my letter of Saturday by wire if possible. (Sgd.), William Harty.
Hon. Wm. Harty, Windsor Hotel, Montreal.- Have received no letter from you. (Sgd.). James Sutherland.
Hon. James Sutherland, Woodstock, Ont.-I mailed you a letter from Kingston Saturday night. You will likely receive it this afternoon. Wire answer to it if possible. (Sgd.), Wm. Harty.
Hon. William Harty, Windsor Hotel, Montreal. 

Your offer to build twenty locomotive engines for the Intercolonial Railway accepted. Order in council already passed to this effect. (Sgd.), James Sutherland, acting Minister of Railways and Canals.	[DOT]
Montreal, November 5,	1900.-Hon. James
Sutherland, Woodstock, Ont.-Thanks for order. (Sgd.), William Harty.
Montreal, November 6, 1900.-Edward J. B. Pense, Kingston, Ont.-Have just completed, at 4 p.m., purchase of locomotive works from liquidators. Have secured contract from government for twenty engines for Intercolonial Railway, and am promised twelve by Mackenzie & Mann. In endeavouring to help myself I rejoice in indirectly being able to do something for my old employees of the locomotive works. Home to-morrow noon. (Sgd.), William Harty. The Option to Mr. King Ended Monday-Mr. Harty Bought Tuesday-No Delay About That.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Blair).: Mr. Speaker,
I can make no statement as to the publication of the poster referred to in the question, but the correspondence as set forth is substantially correct. The government was attacked by its opponents for placing orders for locomotives in the United States of America, although there was no manufacturing establishment then in operation in Canada capable of executing the orders, and when a company of Canadian capitalists was prepared to revive, enlarge and sufficiently capitalize the Kingston works,

which had closed down, the government felt it to be its duty to afford the company all proper assistance and encouragement in its power. In accordance with this policy, an order in council was thereupon passed on October 16, authorizing a contract to be entered into, and later, on December 22 last, the contract was executed between the government and the Canadian company.


I.C.R.-ERECTION OP STATION AT PASSE-KEAG, N.B.
Mr. FOWLER asked :: 1.	Have tenders been received for the erection of a station at Passekeag, N.B. ?
2.	If so, from whom have such tenders been received, and what is the amount of each tender?
3.	Has the government, or the Department of Railways and Canals, accepted any, and if so, what tender?
4.	Has the contract been let; if so, to whom, and if not, why not?
5.	Has the erection been begun; if not, why not?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Blair) :: 1.	Yes, tenders have been received for the construction of a station of Passekeag, N.B.
2.	Tenders were received from Mr. Peter Campbell, and Messrs. Hiram M. and Harvey Copp. The amount of Mr. Campbell's tender was $500, and Messrs. Copp's, $700.
3.	The tender of Mr. Peter Campbell was accepted.
4.	This contract has been let to Peter Campbell.
5.	The erection has not been commenced, as the exact location has not yet been decided upon.


POSTMASTER AT LOWER MILLSTREAM, N.B.
Mr. FOWLER asked :: 1.	Has Mr. John E. McAuley, for many years postmaster at Lower Millstream, King's County, N.B., been dismissed?
2.	If so, why, and at whose instance?
3.	What charges, if any, were made against him, and was an investigation held?
4.	Has a petition been received to retain Mr. McAuley in his position? If so, how many names were attached ?
5.	Has his successor been appointed? If so, did he apply for the position, or was he recommended, and by whom ?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton) :: 1.	Yes.
2.	Mr. McAuley was removed from office for being an active political partisan, on the representations of Lieut.-Col. James Domville, ex-M.P.
3.	See answer to No. 2. In view of the representations made, an investigation was not considered necessary.
4. Yes-54.	Lieut.-Col. Domville states that the large majority of the signers do not
reside in the district served by the Lower Millstream post office.
5. Mr. Henry A. McPhee has been appointed postmaster of Lower Millstream. He did not apply for the appointment. He was recommended for the office by Lieut.-Col. Domville.


THE PARIS EXPOSITION.
Mr. TAYLOR (by Mr. Clarke) asked :: What has been the total amount paid in connection with the Paris Exposition up to February 1, 1901?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE (Hon. Sydney A. Fisher).: The total amount expended for the Paris Exhibition to the 31st January, 1901, was $286,165.71 ; less overcharge for space (refunded), $10,641.43; total, $275,524.28.


GOVERNMENT PRINTING.
Mr. CLARKE asked :: 1.	What sums have been paid by the government, since June 30 last, for printing done in offices other than the Government Printing Bureau in this city?
2.	What are the offices in which such printing was done ?
3.	What is the total amount paid to each office for such printing?
4.	What is the nature and class of work, if any, given to such outside establishments ?


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) :: 1.	The Herald, Montreal, $16,140.55, printing immigration pamphlets; Stovel Co., Winnipeg, $3.75, printing certificates ; Advertiser Printing Co., London, $6.50, printing lists of letter boxes ; J. Hope & Sons, Ottawa, $54.50, requisition books special; J. Coombs, Charlottetown, $25.50, forms of tenders and posters.
2,	3, 4. Besides above, there was paid for printing voters' lists, as follows Herald. Montreal, $1,040.06 ; Witness, Montreal, $838.47 ; Ontario Reformer, Oshawa, $41.36; Hunter. Rose & Co., Toronto, $824 ; Monetary Times, Toronto, $736.49 ; Warwick Bros., & Rutter, Toronto, $1,397.10 ; Murray Printing Co., Toronto, $2,826.29; Wm. Briggs, Toronto, $2,477.48 ; La Patrie, Montreal, $275.53.


YUKON-MINING REGULATIONS.
Mr. MORIN asked :: Have the regulations respecting the size of mining locations been changed since the year 1897?
If so, in what respect have such changes been made, and the date or dates thereof?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: 1. By an order in council, dated the 18th of January, 1898, provision was made that placer mining claims in the Yukon territory be increased

to 250 feet in length, the side boundaries to be lines along bed rock three feet above the edge of the creek or lowest general level of the gulch.
2.	By an order in council, dated the 21st of March, 1898, quartz mining claims on Dominion lands were increased to 1,500 feet in length by 1,500 feet in breadth.
3.	By an order in council, dated the 12th of September, 1898, provision was made for granting entry for copper mining locations in the Yukon territory, having an area of 160 acres in a square block.
4.	By an order in council, dated the 20th February, 1899, provision was made that one discoverer of a new mine should receive a claim 1,000 feet long, and a party of two discoverers two claims amounting altogether to 1,500 feet, also that creek or gulch claims should extend 1,000 feet on each side of the creek or gulch, and that river and hill claims should be 1,000 feet in depth.


THE DUTY ON LUMBER.
[Stage Direction]
On the motion :
That In the opinion of this House, duties should be levied upon lumber imported into Canada corresponding with those now existing upon lumber entering the United States.-Mr. Bennett.
Robert Laird Borden: Stand.


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: I have no objection that this motion should stand, but I would remind the House that this is the fourth time the order has been called, and if we are to have a short session, I think my hon. friend (Mr. Borden) will agree with me that the government will have to ask for another day very shortly.


Robert Laird Borden: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Bennett) is not in the House now, and that is the reason the motion cannot be proceeded with to-day.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Very well, it stands.


CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN GENERAL HUTTON AND LT.-COL.
[Stage Direction]
On the order being called for return of correspondence, &c., between General Hutton and Lt.-Col. Sam. Hughes.-Mr. Hughes.
Mr. S. HUGHES (North Victoria).: I would ask, Mr. Speaker, that this matter should be allowed to stand for some time yet, as there are two letters which I have not now in my possession, and for which I have written to the other side of the water. If the right hon. gentleman allows the motion to stand for a few days more,
I shall be prepared to take it up.
The PfUME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier). It stands for to-day.


Clifford Sifton: 


TELEGRAPH LINE BETWEEN BENNETT AND DAWSON.
[Stage Direction]
Sir CHARLES HIBBERT TUPPER moved for :
Return of all reports made by Mr. Charleson respecting telegraph construction work formerly or now under his charge ; showing also the names of men employed under him between Bennett and Dawson and the nationality of each so far as possible; the wages and allowances for each man so employed; particulars as to any strikes on the part of the men for higher wages; the names of parties who supplied the poles for the telegraph wire; and copies of all contracts and correspondence respecting the same; whether standing trees en route have been used for stringing wires, and if so, for what distance approximately, in comparison with the distance where poles were used; how many poles were paid for, how many of those panl for were not used for the telegraph line; whether the linemen employed at Dawson, Ogilvie, Selwyn, Selkirk, Five Fingers, Lower LeBarge and Tagish are British subjects, and if not, the nationality of each; the names of sub-contractors for the supply of poles, and the residence of each subcontractor, and all contracts respecting the same; the terms of charter of ss. W. S. Stratton, the charterer's name and all papers respecting the same; the name of her master and acting master and his nationality; the terms of the charter party ; the use made of this steamer, whether she was used for supplies or otherwise, and what boats other than scows were so used; how many scows were used and on what terms; the amount charged or paid for transportation by water outside of the ss. Stratton, the length of time during construction Mr. Charleson was actually present with the construction party ; the particulars as to purchase of ss. Lullie C., the purchase, disposal or sale or transfer of the boat and the terms thereof respectively; copies of all reports and correspondence respecting the same; the arrangement for supplies made and with whom; the arrangement at Bennett respecting pay for men's time returning from Dawson; the amount already paid for the line under Mr. Charleson's charge; copies of accounts rendered and of accounts paid in connection with this telegraph work, the rate of pay first and now allowed A. Boyer, assistant to Mr. Charleson; also a statement showing where Mr. Charleson places his orders in Vancouver in this connection and on what terms, and what commissions, if any, are paid on these supplies, and to whom; the name of Mr. Charleson's agent at Vancouver in this connection; the quantity of supplies obtained by Mr. Charleson from the United States; whether Mr. Charleson's son was paid $350 or other amount or amounts for expenses of a trip to Ottawa or otherwise, and whether he is or was then an employee of the government; whether Mr. Charleson awards contracts to his foreman, and whether the foreman's expenses were paid into the locality of operations at government expense, and whether tenders are asked for in this connection; and all contracts, reports, and papers respecting contracts let by Mr. Charleson or under his supervision in connection with the telegraph line from Bennett to Dawson.
He said :	In moving for the papers in
connection with this matter, one or two words are due by way of explanation, and I think an explanation is also due from the Minister of Public Works (Hon. Mr. FEBRUARY 18, 1901
Tarte), or from some member of tbe government in regard to the very curious circumstances connected with the attempt to obtain from the government some details of the expenditure of about half a million dollars of public moneys in connection with the two telegraph routes in the northern portion of British Columbia and the Yukon.
In the discharge of my duties as a member of parliament last year, I made an effort to obtain information upon some facts, which if they are correct suggest that there has been a scandalous waste of public money, and that there had not been proper supervision over the expenditure. I was immediately met in a spirit far different from that which I would have expected from a self-respecting government. There appears to be a most extraordinary effort, not merely to keep from parliament the information to which it is entitled on this subject, but immediately that a member of this House endeavours to obtain full information on matters coming to his notice touching the expenditure of this money, it would seem that he must be prepared to be the object of attack and slander. Last session Mr. Bergeron, then a member of the House, failed to obtain the information, and I succeeded in getting from the Prime Minister a pledge that the information would be given ; but instead of the information being given to the House, a telegram was read in my absence by the present member for Burrard (Mr. Maxwell) -read contrary to the rules of this House, and contrary to the practice that should obtain in connection with the discharge of the responsible duties of members of parliament-and in that telegram I was accused of having uttered a false slander, or. with having repeated a falsehood on the floor of the House, although I had taken pains to say that while the information that had reached me was serious, I would take no responsibility whatever in connection with the facts mentioned. The Postmaster General (Hon. Mr. Mulock) asked me if I was speaking from my own knowledge, and as ' Hansard ' shows, I took care to say that Mr. Charleson (whose name is involved) should not be unfairly attacked in the House, that such was not at all my intention ; that this information had been brought to my notice. He occupied a position as a public servant who was given very large powers and a very large discretion in connection with an exceedingly large sum of public money ; and I pressed, both in his interest and in the interest of the public, for the immediate communication of the facts by the government to the House. Not that I wished to pin Mr. Charleson in an unenviable position ; not that 1 anticipated that his character would not be completely established when the return was brought down ; but for every reason I urged that the return should be brought down. Promises were made from time to
time, and those promises were not complied with. Although this subject was brought to the attention of parliament as long ago as February of last session by Mr. Bergeron, what happened ? First of all, he asked a question in detail, which involved reflections on Mr. Charleson and on the Department of Public Works, as many of these questions, if they are not answered or explained satisfactorily, do involve reflections on the responsible head of the department. These questions, instead of being answered, were met by a request on the part of the Minister of Public Works to move for a return, as is often done ; and Mr. Bergeron turned his question into the form of a notice of motion. Time and again in my presence Mr. Bergeron attempted to move that motion, and at the request of the government the motion stood. It stood until so many private members' days were made government days that it became a certainty that the motion could never be put ; and consequently, the motion was dropped in order to comply with another rule of the House, so that when the House was in Committee of Supply or on going into Supply, there could be a discussion on the subject of that notice of motion. Finding, however, that that would be unfair to all, I, in the absence of Mr. Bergeron, asked the Prime Minister in this House if he would permit me to move for these papers summarily, without having to wait till motions were called. As I understood, the government did not object to that, and I said I would allow that to stand as a notice ; but, later on, when I was about to make the motion, the Prime Minister took objection to my making a motion without its going on the Order paper, which, as all those familiar with parliamentary practice will understand, meant that during that session motions could not be moved ; but, although the Prime Minister took the objection, he agreed across the House that he would see that these papers were gathered together and brought down, in order that before we reached the Public Works estimates, in charge of which was the Hon. Postmaster General, the House would have full information on these matters. The papers not coming down, an appeal was again made by myself to the Treasury benches ; and the Postmaster General stated, and in so far exculpated the Prime Minister, that the Prime Minister had, in accordance with his agreement across the floor of the House, sent word to the Department of Public Works to press on the preparation of those papers, and have them laid before the House on the earliest possible day ; and the Postmaster General said he had repeated those directions to the department. Time went on ; the papers were not brought down ; they have not reached the House of Commons yet ; so that on the day that this House met, I put a question to the Minister
[Stage Direction]
of Public Works referring to the pledge of the Prime Minister and the pledge of the Postmaster General when acting Minister of Public Works, promising those papers at the earliest possible day, the last promise being in June, 1900 ; and I was more than astounded when the Minister of Public Works began again the tactics of last session, and told me to put my notice on the paper, which I have done. And so it will take time, we do not know how long, if the practice of last session is followed, In order to get these papers brought down. I would not have referred at such length to this matter were it not for the invidious position in which it was attempted, unfairly, to place me. What is to be the rule in this House ? Are hon. gentlemen on either side of you, Sir, to be encouraged or discouraged in bringing to the only place where such matters can be satisfactorily settled, and the facts cleared up, matters involving often the character of public servants, matters whispered at the corners of the streets or published in the newspapers, and which, if true, show that there is something rotten in the state of Denmark ? Or, is every hon. gentleman supposed, before he ventures to inquire how the public money is expended, to be bound to hold a court of investigation off his own bat, to summon before him gentlemen supposed to have knowledge of the matters, and obtain from them solemn declarations ? Though I have been in parliament for some years, I have never yet heard of such a suggestion; and if the House listened to the telegrams which were read here, contrary to the rules of the House, as I have said, it would appear that my idea of the position and the rights and responsibilities of a member of parliament is entirely wrong ; because, while these papers were withheld by the government, their supporters were permitted to read these insulting and improper communications to the House, criticising and reflecting on the position taken by me, whereas, in fact, as I have endeavoured to explain, I made no charge, and I have made no charge now ; but I did bring forward as a formal motion for information in the possession of the government, the facts or the statements which had come to my knowledge, and in regard to which I assumed it to be not merely my duty, but primarily the duty of the government, to give the most immediate and perfect investigation possible under the circumstances ; and I do not think it was just to the officers whose names are covered by my motion, Mr. Oharleson, for example, or any of the others connected with the expenditure of that public money under him. that these matters should have been permitted by the government to have stood so long without the House being given the official information which is in the hands of the government. For instance, take this Sir CHARLES HIBBERT TUPPER.
statement in regard to the second branch of Mr. Charleson's work. I referred immediately last year-though my motion now covers both matters-to the telegraph line from Bennett to Dawson, in regard to which statements, which were in everybody's mouth, were made to me, as I stated then, by men in Mr. Charleson's employ ; that is to say, statements touching the contracts for telegraph poles, that while those contracts were let by Mr. Oharleson, and the poles were strewn along the route, the trees were used, and very properly used, for stringing the line over a large portion of the route. Nevertheless, the country paid for the poles, which will never be used, but which will rot before they are needed for the fine. Things like that suggest not only incompetency, but a great deal more. I do not, however, undertake to vouch for any of those statements, and I ask that immediate light be let into this matter from government sources, to which this gentleman was bound to report. Then, there were matters connected with the charters of one or two tugs or small boats. All of these things were suggested in detail, the fullest exposure of the information in my possession was made, and the Order paper contains those statements without any explanation having been given at the hands of the government during a whole session, from February until July.
Now comes this statement, that with regard to the other contract, involving a large sum of money, for the line from Quesnel in British Columbia to Telegraph Creek at Atlin, so scandalous had been the transaction, and so great the incompetence, an incompetence amounting to wrong-doing, that the line has gone seventy miles beginning at the two termini of the line, and they cross each other with seventy miles of country between them. That may be a myth, but if it be true, the money of the public is being wasted, and we should have the assistance of the government in coming to a conclusion. _
It is not sufficient to say that newspapers very often make misstatements. It has been the Imperial practice to bring to the attention of the government rumours in the press that seem to be well sustained, when they affect the expenditure of the people's money, and that such rumours should be promptly and fully investigated and satisfactorily answered by the responsible members of the government.
We have in the Auditor General's Report of this year the items of vouchers for a very large expenditure of this money. These papers ought to be ready now if the ministers have any authority whatever, for we have had the hon. the Postmaster General stating that in June last, in compliance with the Prime Minister's request, he gave directions to have them immediately pre-

pared ; and if they are ready, I would like to have them brought down to the House at the earliest possible moment.
I understand that Mr. Charleson is here. At any rate he was here a few days ago. Last session he was here and disappeared, and no doubt his duties called him away, but it would be a great convenience, in connection with the proper auditing of these items in the Auditor General's Report, touching an expenditure of $300,000 or $400,000, under the direction of Mr. Charleson, that he should be here. He was given -probably necessarily so-the widest possible powers, and he ought to be present, in view of the fact that many of the matters covered by my motion affect him personally. Therefore, in his interest, as well as that of the public, every expedition should be used so that an audit may be made in the most effective manner.
The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. J. I. Tarte).: All the papers that have been asked for will be brought down without any delay, and then my hon. friend will be found to have again made statements to the House for which there is no foundation. If he will permit me to use the word without any offence, I think it is unfair to use such big words as ' scandalous ' before the papers are brought down. If anything is wrong, the time will come when that wrong will be shown, but before anything is proved-and nothing will be proved-I say again it is unfair to make statements of the kind the hon. gentleman has indulged in.
Mr. Charleson has directed those two important works very efficiently. He has constructed the line between Bennett and Dawson, a length of 650 miles, and has been complimented all over the country on the diligence he has shown. During last season he had constructed no less than 1,350 miles of telegraph lines under very great difficulties indeed. Every precaution was taken by the department. An accountant of the Department of Public Works was with him all the time, the Auditor General sent one of his officers with him to look over the accounts, and I am quite sure that when the papers are brought down, all the accusations made-because these are accusations-will be found to have no foundation whatever. I do not see that it will serve any good purpose to discuss the question at greater length, but I must say that it is no encouragement to public officers to find that they are treated in the way my hon. friend treats officers who have after all accomplished great things. The construction of these lines is considered a deed of great ability. There is to-day only a small gap of about fifty miles not completed. That gap will be completed as soon as the season permits, and I expect that by the first of July next we will have telegraphic communication from Ottawa to Dawson City.


Sir CHARLES HIBBERT TTJPPER.: The hon. the Minister of Public Works will not be permitted to throw across the floor of the House such insulting observations with regard to myself without, at any rate, my resenting his conduct in that regard. By what authority does he state that I will again be found to have made assertions not based on fact.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Hear, hear.


Charles Hibbert Tupper: I challenge the hon. gentleman to point out a single matter concerning which I have made false assertions in this House. If he were familiar wjth the English language he would have understood-perhaps he did understand me-but if he did he would certainly not have said that I made one charge against Mr. Charleson. If the English language is capable of expressing what 1 sought "to say, all I did say was that if the allegations covered by my motion were true, they involved scandalous reflection, not so much on Mr. Charleson, as on the government for having withheld the information required. I said that it was unfair to Mr. Charleson or to any officer in the employ of any department that these matters should be allowed to stand over their heads. I did not say that Mr. Charleson was on his defence, but simply suggested that it was the duty of the government to bring down the fullest information in their possession, even though that information should involve some reflection on the officers of the government or their political head, and it is the political head who is in a most unenviable position. He it is who is responsible for having withheld this information. If there be any justification for the suggestion that there has been an intentional withholding of the information-and the facts seem to warrant if-then the reflection is entirely, so far as this House is concerned, upon the head of the Public Works Department.
My use of the word * scandalous,' which seems to have excited the hon. Minister of Public Works, though, I supposed, he should have become accustomed by this time to that word-when I used that word, I did not say that the acts of any man under him were scandalous. I said that in the acts of those under him, if the statements made in the reports were correct, there was a very great scandal. And I want to say this before I sit down, and say it) in connection with these acts, as in connection with others that come under review of the House or of the Public Accounts Committee-I shall be delighted to find that there is not the slightest foundation for any of the suggestions in that motion. I have never met Mr. Charleson and never heard of him in connection with anything else than this public business. His character may have been, and may

be now, all that his friends claim it to be. But, as I say, under the circumstances, even if his character is white as snow, when he has to do with the expenditure of a large sum of public money, and when the matter comes before a member of the House, it is his bounden duty to press, as I do, for the fullest information, and to inquire into the matter to the very bottom.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr.  E. F.@: CLARKE (West Toronto) moved for :	[DOT]
Copies of all papers, telegrams, &c., respecting the pay of the men of ' C ' Battery, Canadian Artillery, which served in South Africa ; or respecting the deduction of any portion of the pay of the men or any of them.
He said : I make the motion at the suggestion of the hon. Minister of Militia and Defence (Hon. Mr. Borden). I had hoped that it would be possible to get the information by a series of questions which 1 placed upon the Paper a few days ago ; but it was the hon. minister's wish that the information should be obtained by presenting this motion. I may say, as justification for doing so, that grave dissatisfaction exists among a great number of the members of the battery who allege that they were not treated as generously as they ought to have been treated. They claim that when they volunteered their services to assist Her Majesty's forces in South Africa, they did not haggle over the terms of their engagement, and, consequently, they had a right to expect that the government of Canada would live up to the spirit as well as the letter of the Act of Parliament under which their, pay was ordered. The provision for paying them may be found in the schedule of the Act passed last session, making provision for the expenses of the volunteers who were serving with Her Majesty's forces in South Africa. From what I can gather from those who have interviewed me, and who complain of the treatment they have received, a unique condition of affairs exists. It is claimed that a large percentage of the men of the battery assigned their pay, before leaving Canada, to their relatives or friends, and that these have received the full pay to which they were entitled ; while the men who did not make an assignment have received practically nothing from the hands of the government of Canada since they arrived at Cape Town on their way to the front. ' C ' Battery was engaged with Col. Plumer's column, and spent a considerable portion of its time in operating in the territory of the colony of Rhodesia. I understand that the climatic conditions existing there are of the worst character, that it is the
Sir CHARLES HIBB3RT TTJPPER.
worst place in Africa for malaria and fever; and that it was difficult for the men, in passing through that territory, to obtain any provisions or any little comforts, more difficult than if they had been on service in any other part of the territory in which the campaign was carried on. The Rhodesian government, from what I have been informed, first proposed to give each man who took part with Col. Plumer's column a grant of land. They afterwards changed their proposition and voted a lump sum to be given to those who operated in Rhodesian territory in that column. No portion of this money was paid to the men of the battery until two or three days before they reached Halifax on their way home. It was then paid to them by the officer whose duty it was to make the disbursement. The sum paid to each gunner or private, I believe, was between $130 and $140. When the men of the battery arrived at Halifax, they were informed that checks for the Canadian pay due them were deposited in their envelopes, together with their discharge, but these checks were removed from the envelopes and the men were requested to give their names and addresses and were told that the money coming to them would be forwarded to them in due course. It was evidently the intention of the government of Canada to pay these men the sum that had accumulated and was standing at their credit, at the time they arrived back from South Africa ; and the men are rather at a loss to understand what was the cause of the change in the determination of the government. I do not desire to take up the time of the House, but these are the facts as I understand them. If I have stated them correctly, the government has been guilty of an ungenerous act-may I use the word, of an picayune act ?-in depriving the men of this sum on the plea that Canada is to pay only the difference between the rate named in the schedule of the Act and that which they received from the British government during their service in South Africa. I hope the government will decide to reverse their order and send the men checks for the amounts coming to them. The men state that, while the volunteers! from Australia and New Zealand who formed part of the Plumer column were equally, beneficiaries of the Rhodesian government, the governments of Australia and New Zealand made no deduction of their pay when they returned to their own country. If the men have stated the facts correctly, they have made out a strong case ; and I hope the minister will announce the intention of the government, notwithstanding the fact that the Rhodesian government has given the money I have stated, not to withhold from the men a sum equivalent to the difference between Imperial pay and the pay guaranteed to them by the Canadian government.	.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. F. W. Borden).: I think it is hardly fair of my hon. friend (Mr. Clarke) to apply the word ' ungenerous' to the treatment of the South African volunteers by the government, or to speak of the government ' depriving ' certain members of the contingent of their proper pay. The hon. gentleman knows very well that the statute of last session prescribed the amount the men who went to South Africa in our various contingents were to be paid, and the manner of that payment. The matter was fully discussed in this House ; and in the statute under which $2,000,000 was voted, an order in council was incorporated prescribing a maximum of pay to be given to these men and providing that should the imperial pay fall short of that prescribed amount it should be made up out of the amount voted by parliament. The statute was very clear on the point, it seems to me. Explaining the word expenditure' in this statute it says it includes :
(b) The pay and allowances of each such volunteer (both before and after the date of his debarkation in South Africa) at the rates named in the order in council dated the thirteenth day of March, one thousand nine hundred, set forth in the schedule of this Act, the provisions of which order in council are hereby approved and confirmed.
Now, so far as ' O ' Battery, which is immediately under discussion, is concerned, the pay of the men of that battery was limited by clause B of section 1 of the order in council, which is a part of the Act, to 75 cents for each private, and the difference between the Imperial pay and 75 cents was to be paid by this government, either directly to the men after their return, after their service was over, or if they assigned their claim to any of their dependents in this country, it was to be paid as the service progressed. Now it turns out that ' 0 ' Battery served in Rhodesia under Imperial pay. That, I think, is a vital question to this whole argument, whether the pay was, in the sense contemplated by the statute, Imperial pay under the Imperial warrant. I have asked that question of the officials in my department, and they inform me that there is no question but that the pay received by ' C ' Battery for their services in South Africa, which was five shililngs a day per man, was Imperial pay in the sense mentioned in this section. Now, the fact is that the men of ' O ' Battery received five shillings a day ; the fact is tnat the Department of Militia is limited by the statute from which I have just read to 75 cents per day per man. How then is it possible for the government, under the statute, to pay these men additional when they have already received a very large amount in excess of the total amount that they are authorized to receive in Imperial pay and additional pay from Canada, when, in fact, they have already received far more than
the amount that we are authorized to give 1 That is the question which I had to face, and I am advised by the officers of my department, that under this statute we had no authority whatever to pay those men anything additional.
The hon. gentleman has said that a large percentage of the men of ' C ' Battery have received more than the others. It is true that about one-third of the men, on going away, as in the case of all the contingents, assigned their additional pay, that is, the pay they were to receive over and above the Imperial pay, to their dependents in this country ; and the Militia Department paid them in ignorance of the fact-which should,
I think, have been reported to this department by the officers of ' C ' Battery-but, at any rate, in ignorance of the fact that the men were already in receipt of more money than we were authorized to pay. The fact is that, in my judgment, and in the judgment of my officers, instead of the government of Canada being under an obligation to pay more money to the two-thirds, the one-third who have received it ought properly to return to the treasury that money which they have improperly received. That is the situation as viewed by my department, and which I endorse. The hon. gentleman says that cheques were made out, and taken down to Halifax to be handed to these men. That is quite true. It was not until these men landed in Halifax that the officers of the department were aware that they had already received more pay than was authorized by statute. Then, of course, the cheques were withheld, and were destroyed. More than that, I may say that the officer in command of the battery, as I am informed by the accountant of my department, who was present at the time, the moment the battery landed at Halifax, told the officers of the Militia Department that the battery had already received more pay than was authorized by statute, that they were perfectly satisfied, that the additional pay was not expected and should not be handed to them. Now, I make that statement here as having been reported to me, I have it from the accountant of my department. So, I think, in view of what I have said, that the government is not fairly chargeable with haggling or with ungenerous treatment, or with having deprived these men of anything which properly belonged to them.


Edward Frederick Clarke: May I ask the minister if I understand him to say that the men received pay from the Imperial government at the amount of five shillings per day in addition to the Rhodesian bounty ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: No, there was no Rhodesian bounty, it was daily pay at five shillings, and that pay was, strictly speaking, according to the letter of the law, as I am in-

formed, and was paid within the meaning of the term ' Imperial pay ' under the Imperial warrant.


Mr. DAVID HENDERSON (Halton).: A few days ago I was induced to place on the Notice paper a question respecting the matter which is referred to in the motion of the member for West Toronto (Mr. Clarke). I was induced to do so on account of a communication which I had received from a member of ' C ' Battery who resided in the county I have the honour to represent. I then discovered that these cases were quite numerous, and I was anxious to ascertain the facts with reference to these men, because I, like others, thought it a hardship to the men who enlisted with an understanding that the very best pay was to be given to those who went to South Africa and suffered all the hardships that they did, and I thought, at the time the Minister of Militia and Defence answered my question, that his answer rather evaded the whole question. However, I have learned to-day more of the drift of the matter, and the grounds which the hon. gentleman takes. Now, I must confess that I cannot for a moment think that the Rhodesian government intended that the five shillings a day they gave these men, under special and peculiar circumstances, was ever intended to be a part of their pay, or that it was in any sense whatever intended to release either the British government or the Canadian government from paying these men what it was originally intended to give them. What object could that governemnt have in doing so ? Were they so flush with money, had they such an abundance of gold in that country, or did they think that the British Empire was too poor and that the Dominion of Canada was too poor to pay these men, and therefore they had to come to their rescue and pay them the deficiency ? I cannot look at the matter in that way at all. I can only think that the Rhodesian government, in consideration of the services these men rendered for the protection of property in that country, did not give the five shillings a day as any portion of their pay, but as a bounty-we may call it what we like. It was a gift, it was a present, and ought to be treated as such by the government of this country, who, I think, will yet see their way clear to change the decision they have arrived at, and give these men the full sum that was voted by this parliament a year ago. I trust that they will do so, because there will be fairness in doing so. Certainly, if it transpired that sixty men have been paid in full and some one hundred and twenty men are to receive a very much less sum, there would be a very great deal of dissatisfaction. In behalf of my constituents, and of others, I appeal to the hon. Minister of Militia to reverse his decision, and have no breaking of faith with Mr. BORDEN (King's).
the men who went to South Africa to fight the battles of the empire.


Nathaniel Clarke Wallace: I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Militia whether the British government gave any pay to ' C ' Battery?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: No, nothing outside of the 5 shillings.


Mr. B. M. BRITTON (Kingston).: Mr. Speaker, there are two points involved ; one is whether the amount paid by the Rhodesian government is Imperial pay within the meaning of our statute. The second point is that, assuming it is Imperial pay within the meaning of our statute, whether, under the circumstances, it would not be better for our government to pay the difference treating it as bounty, rather than have the dissatisfaction existing which now exists. I know that it will involve a considerable sum.


Edward Frederick Clarke: How much ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: About $17,000.


Byron Moffatt Britton: Of course, I do not know the exact figure. It is somewhat of a surprise that the matter has been practically decided by the government, as I infer it has been from the answer which the hon. minister makes. I suppose it is under consideration practically and that the matter will be dealt with in a way that will be considered fair to all parties. The other point to which I call attention is that, in some way or other, it has been possible that some men in connection with ' C ' Battery have got more pay than others. This is an unfortunate state of matters, because, although it has been paid to those dependent upon them by reason of their pay being assigned, the payment to all intents and purposes, was to themselves. They have got the benefit of it. If these men have received pay to a larger extent, treating it as if this Rhodesian pay were not a matter of bounty, or gift, something different from the Imperial pay, and others did not get the same treatment, there is going to be a felt hardship and wrong done to some of these men. Therefore, I sincerely hope that there will be some remedy found so that all many feel that they are treated fairly and generously in this matter. It is better to lose a few thousand dollars to enable these other men to get their pay according to what was really the intention than that there should be any cause of dissatisfaction on the part of any one.


Robert Laird Borden: Mr. Speaker, I agree with the hon. Minister of Militia (Hon. Mr. Borden) that he must be controlled by the terms of the statute, and if, as a matter of fact, the pay which has been received, is pay provided by Her

Majesty's government, it would be necessary that we should have a further vote before the Department of Militia could make the payment to these men which has been advocated by the gentlemen who have spoken. But, one thing that the hon. gentleman did not make clear to me was how it is that the pay provided by the government of Rhodesia is pay provided by Her Majesty's government. It is true that the hon. gentleman tells us that the officers of his department instruct him that such is the case, but, the question whether such is the case depends, in the first place, upon the facts, which I do not think we have had very clearly before the House, and in the second place, upon the construction of this statute as to which officers of his department are possibly no more capable of advising him than some hon. gentlemen in this House. If the government of Rhodesia provided the pay for these men, I do not exactly understand for what reason you [DOT] can say it was pay provided by Her Majesty's government. The words ' Her Majesty's government ' are used in this order in council and in the statute in contradistinction to ' The government of the Dominion of Canada.' It was evidently intended by the words ' Her Majesty's government ' to refer to the Imperial government. If this pay was not provided by the Imperial government, it seems to me that the case is an open one for the Minister of Militia, and is one as to which he can deal in the way suggested, because it is a case which has not been definitely dealt with by the statute. I must confess that I think the lion. Minister of Militia might enlighten the House a little more fully at some future date as to what the precise facts are in respect to the pay provided by the Rhodesian government, and then the House will perhaps be in a better position to come to a conclusion ns to whether these men should not receive their pay. I agree with what has been said as to the unfortunate condition of affairs in having some of these men paid more than others, and I think it would be extremely desirable on the part of the government to have them all paid alike, even if we went a little beyond the statute of last year. I still think that the hon. Minister of Militia might give us, at some future date, information in regard to the exact facts concerning this pay. What I mean by that is this: suppose that the colony of Natal, or the government of Cape Colony, or any municipality


Edward Frederick Clarke: Or individual.


Robert Laird Borden: Or individual, as my hon. friend (Mr. Clarke) suggests, should in consideration of distinguished services rendered to a colony, or city, or municipality, vote a sum of money to any particular battalion of the contingent that we sent to South Africa, it is certainly perfectly clear that that should not be al-5
lowed to reduce the pay which that battalion should receive from this government. The question is whether or not the money which these men received from the Rhodesian government is of that character or whether it is within the terms of this statute pay provided by the Imperial government. If it is the latter I think the hon. Minister of Militia is perfectly right, but if the former, I think he should reconsider his decision.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: If I might be allowed to say one word here by way of explanation it will be this ; in the first place it is evidently the spirit of our law that all the men who went to South Africa with the second contingent should receive 75 cents a day. It does not seem to me material where they received it from. The idea was that they should receive 75 cents a day and no more.


William Findlay Maclean: No, no.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: Yes, assuming that the Imperial pay would be below that. There was no other pay to these men ; that is the pay which they received, 5 shillings a day, and the information is that this was Imperial pay at Rhodesian rates. All the men received Imperial pay from the Imperial exchequer at Rhodesian rates, 5 shillings a day.


Mr. W. B. NORTHRUP (East Hastings).: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me pre-eminently the case that this motion should prevail, because hon. gentlemen seem to be wandering from the point before the House. It is a motion for certain papers. The remarks made by the hon. Minister of Militia (Hon. Mr. Borden) show clearly that if any decision in reference to it is to be arrived at it is desirable that the papers should come down, so that, with the papers before it, this House dan come to a conclusion in regard to it.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: We will bring the papers down.


William Barton Northrup: So far nothing has been said by the hon. minister to indicate that he will bring the papers down. The moment the motion is adopted the papers will come down, and I venture to say that there is nothing to discuss until they are brought down. I venture to suggest that the hon. minister instead of conferring with his subordinate officers should place the matter before the hon. Minister of Justice, because it is pre-eminently a legal question. Perhaps, when the papers are brought down and the matter comes up it may be settled in the House.


William Findlay Maclean: Mr. Speaker, if the government really desire to settle the question and to treat all these men alike, if there is any doubt about the statute, they can bring in a supplementary



Bill this session, or the matter may be dealt with by a clause in the Supply Bill. In that way the men can be fairly treated, as the House desires to see them treated.


Samuel Hughes: Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister of Militia (Hon. Mr. Borden) to this aspect of the case. When did this Rhodesian pay begin ; did it begin the day they left Cape Town, and when did it end 1 How far south did these men come before that pay ceased, and when did they get it ? Who is the paymaster, and was it all on the one paysheet ? These are questions which may very well engage the attention of the minister. I would draw attention to the fact that it would be inadvisable if some of 'C' Battery were to get extra pay and others not. I would also point out that a great many men in the other two batteries feel that they did just as good work, and travelled through just as inhospitable a country and unhealthy a climate as did those men, and yet they were limited to the ordinary pay.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Sir CHARLES HIBBERT TUPPER moved for :
Return in tabular form showing the names of all cases in which an appeal has been taken to the hon. the Minister of the Interior (past and present) under the mining regulations, the date when each appeal was perfected, heard and decided.
He said : The other day the Minister of the Interior (Hon. Mr. Sifton) stated that the question of sending these appeals to the judicial tribunals was under consideration, and I trust that later on the result of that consideration will be announced. I think the time has come when the question should be discussed, and in view of such discussion it would be most convenient to have this information. I have asked for it in the form that would seem to be most useful, and its preparation will not involve a great deal of labour. Up to the time of the development of the Yukon the appeals, I assume, were few and far between, and consequently the table would be most useful if it began from the period of the first appeal. The Department of the Interior under ordinary circumstances taxes the entire time of any capable and industrious minister apart from these appeals. It has always been the testimony of ministers in charge of that department, that the ordinary business fully occupied the time of the minister and the officials, altogether outside of these judicial functions, [DOT]and as time goes on it will not, I believe, be in the public interest that the Minister of the Interior should be charged with such matters. The order in council which made Mr. MACLEAN.
the minister the final tribunal in these matters no doubt contemplated originally that these appeals would not be very frequent, and it was passed with a view to the expediency, and the cheapness of the disposal of these matters from the unsettled regions of Canada, but the original intent has no application to the Yukon district of to-day, with its judicial tribunals and the opportunities afforded the residents there to bring these legal questions before the courts. It might very well happen, for there is nothing to prevent it, that a gentleman without any legal training might be head of that department, and it would be rather difficult for him to decide on questions of law. The subject is one of exceeding interest and the object of my motion is to have the information before the House when the question is dealt with.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Sir CHARLES HIBBERT TUPPER moved for :
Copies of all reports, letters or communications, not already brought down, from Mr. Ogil-vie, commissioner for Yukon district, received by the government of Canada or any member thereof, or by any deputy minister or other officer, in any way respecting the administration of public affairs in the Yukon district.
The MINISTER OP THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: I would suggest to my hon. friend that he amend his motion so as to have it apply to the papers not already brought down. A very large number of papers comprised in this motion have already been laid on the table, and unless the hon. gentleman wants them recopied there is no necessity for including them.


Charles Hibbert Tupper: I shall have very great pleasure, Mr. Speaker, in agreeing to the amendment which I understand the hon. minister to move, namely, to add the words ' not already brought down.'


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to, and motion as amended agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Copies of all correspondence, telegrams, letters, notes and memoranda exchanged between the Canadian Commissioner at the Paris Exhibition, or any member of the Canadian Commission, and Lord Strathcona, or the Royal Commission, or the Colonial Secretary, in relation to the representation of Canada at the exhibition.-Mr. Bourassa.
List of all railway corporations now doing business in Canada under charter of the Dominion parliament which have received subsidies by cash or land grants or are entitled thereto, and the amount of such subsidy attached to each.- Mr. Smith (Vancouver).

Return showing the amount of the rebate paid on agricultural implements exported from Canada for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1890, 1897, 1898, 1899 and 1900, specifying amount paid to each firm in each of those years.-Mr. Roche (Marquette).
Copies of all reports, official memoranda and papers dealing with irregularities, mistakes by order in council or otherwise in the administration of the provisions of Dominion Lands Act in the Yukon district.-Sir Charles Hibbert Tupper.
ADJOURNMENT-TRADE RELATIONS WITH [DOT]THE UNITED STATES.
M. De Witte has proved his ability to hit quick and hard. He was evidently prepared for reprisals before Secretary Gage took final action. M. De Witte sent to the Senate on Wednesday for publication an ordinance levying 30 per cent increased duty on the most important American imports into Russia. The ordinance was published to-day in the ' Official Messenger,' and becomes effective on March 1. This action is greatly regretted in American circles, who anticipate much harm therefrom.
In a despatch from Washington dealing with this question, in the same paper, the following admissions are made
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: Mr. Speaker, I suppose the House is not disposed to go on with Government Orders to-day, as members have not been notified in advance, and, therefore, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.


William Findlay Maclean: Mr. Speaker, before the motion is put, there is a matter contained in a New York paper to which I wish to direct the attention of the House just for two or three minutes ; and, as we have no other business before us, I think this is the best opportunity to raise this question. It is said that it is rather bad parliamentary form to bring up a question of this kind when the Orders of the Day are called. I do not believe that; but still, to please my hon. friends on the other side of the House, I bring it up on the motion to adjourn.


Mr. SPEAKER.: Well, I may tell the hon. member that on the motion for the adjournment of the House, the only question to be discussed is whether the House shall adjourn now or not. When the Orders of the Day are called, if a formal motion for adjournment is made, not by a member of the cabinet, but by some other hon. member, in order to bring up a question for discussion, he has a right to discuss that special question ; but on the motion for the adjournment of the House, which is the one made now, I do not think there can be any debate except on the question whether the House shall adjourn now or not.


William Findlay Maclean: Well, Mr. Speaker, what I wish to say is that the House should not adjourn until they discuss the question which I propose to bring before them ; and time after time members of this House have exercised the right of calling the attention of the government and the country to important matters on the motion to adjourn. I will only take up the time of the House for two or three minutes. In the New York Tribune of yesterday, there is the following despatch :-
St. Petersburg, Feb. 15.-M. De Witte, Minister of Finance, has issued a decree regarding the application of an increased tariff to certain imports from the United States. The decree is based upon the first paragraph of Article 628 *of the customs statute.
The decree is issued in retaliation for Secretary Gage's order imposing a countervailing duty of 32 cents on each pood (about thirty-six pounds), of Russian bounty-paid sugar imported into the United States, and it is believed that a grave crisis has been reached in trade relations between the United States and Russia.
The immediate effect of the Russian decree, when it becomes operative on March 1, will be to increase by 50 per cent the duties on American steel and iron goods. These goods already enjoy two separate reductions, 30 per cent and 20 per cent from the conventional duties. The articles referred to in the Russian decree are machinery and tools of every kind, manufactures and products of cast iron and steel. The addition of 50 per cent to the duty will, it is thought, prove practically prohibitory.


Mr. TALBOT.: Wbat has all that to do with Canada \


William Findlay Maclean: What it has to do with Canada is this. To-day we have grave issues with the United States, and if we follow the example of the Russian government and Mr. De Witte, and give the Americans tariff for tariff, reciprocity of tariffs, we will bring them to time. You will never get the Alaskan boundary question settled satisfactorily unless you do this. The way the Americans will settle the Alaskan boundary question will be the way the United States Senate attempted to settle the question of the Nicaragua canal the other day, unless hon. gentlemen opposite have stiffer backs ; it will be by an Act of the Senate of the United States instead of by negotiation. The point I wish to make is that we must have a little De Witteism in our government. We must have a tariff with a sliding scale, which will be friendly to a friendly government, but will be protective as against an unfriendly government. I do not say that we should go to work and revise our tariff immediately.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh.


William Findlay Maclean: I mean that I cannot bring forward a revised tariff ; that is for the government. But I wish to say that if the government expect to settle the ques-I tions that are unsettled to-day between Canada and the United States, there is only one way to do it, and that is by means of the tariff. There is no way in which you can touch the Americans so quickly as

through their pocket. If they find their goods barred out of Canada, they will quickly come to time. Why, what would that mean to them ? In 1890 we imported $57,000,000 worth of goods from the United States. That sum has grown to-day to $90,000,000 or more, and it is growing steadily. Canada is the best outside market the United States have. But as long as we are fools enough to let their goods come into this country under the present low tariff, while they put up a high tariff to bar out our goods, we shall never get fair treatment from them. The most important question which can be brought up in this House to-day is the question of some sort of tariff reform which will put us in the same position towards the Americans as the so-called out-of-date government of Russia enjoys. That government has a whip in its hand, and it is using it with great effect. The industrial community of the United States is in such a state of alarm that there will soon be all sorts of representations made to Washington, and the American government will be going down on their knees to Russia. I see my hon. frend the First Minister laughing in a jocular way. and the knight from Oxford is looking rather sad over it. But this is a question worthy of their attention, and they have before them a very good example of the way to settle the Alaskan boundary question and to compel the Americans to respect our fishery rights- by treating them in all respects as they treat us.


THE SOUTH AFRICAN CONTINGENTS.
Nathaniel Clarke Wallace: Before the House adjourns, I would like to call the attention of the right hon. First Minister to the following paragraph in the Montreal Gazette of last Saturday :
Loyal Australia.
Fifth Victorian Contingent of 1,500 Men Sails.
Melbourne, Feb. 15.-The fifth Victorian contingent, 1,250 men all told, sailed for South Africa to-day.
Is it the intention of the government to send another contingent from Canada to South Africa ?


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: It is a rule of parliament not to bring up more than one subject on a motion to adjourn. I would also remind the hon. gentleman on another feature, that if he wants to put a question to the government, there is another rule requiring him to give notice.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 4.45 p.m.
William Findlay Maclean: Tuesday, February 19, 1901.