DOMINION ELECTIONS ACT AMENDMENT.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day being called:
Mr. PROULX:: I beg to move that Public Bills and Orders be called, and that Order No. 34 be discharged.


Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: What is my hon. triend's idea in making that motion?


Edmond Proulx: The substance of this Bill is an amendment to Bill No. 110, to amend the Dominion Elections Act. When I moved the amendment the other night the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson) objected on the ground that there was a Bill on the Order Paper standing in my name embodying the principle of my amendment.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day being called:
Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: One of the Montreal papers states that on account of a difference between himself and the Government Sir William' Price, the Chairman of the Quebec Board of Harbour Commissioners, has sent in his resignation. May I ask if this rumour is correct?


Sir ROBERT BORDEN:: I am not aware that he has sent in his resignation, but he may have done so. There was an intimation some time ago that he did not propose to continue in that office. The statement that there is any difference between Sir William Price and the Government is absolutely without foundation.



HOUSE OF COMMONS REPRESENTATION ACT AMENDMENT BILL.


[Stage Direction]
The House again in committee, Mr. Sevigny in the Chair, on Bill No. 106, to amend the Representation Act, 1914.-Sir Robert Borden.
Mr. DOHERTY:: This Bill stood for the purpose of further consideration of provisions made with regard to certain changes in the description of constituencies in the province of Quebec. It was then suggested that instead of the form in which the Bill then was, in so far as it modified the description of the constituencies of Quebec East and Quebec West and Jacques Cartier, we 'should adopt as more desirable the form of repealing the sections and substituting other sections containing the proposed alterations.
I have had this done, and 1 now beg to move that section 4 as it was in the Bill that was presented to the House be struck out, and the following be substituted therefor:
4.	Number 6 (b), the description of the electoral district of Quebec East, is repealed and the following is substituted therefor:
" (b) The electoral district of Quebec East which shall consist of the following wards of the city of Quebec to wit: St. John, Jacques Cartier, St. Roch and Limoilou, exclusive of the village of Stadacona."
The change made there is simply the exclusion of the village of Stadacona. Quebec West will now read as follows:
5.	Number 6 (e), the description of the electoral district of Quebec West, is repealed and the fallowing is substituted therefor:
"(c) The electoral district of Quebec West which shall consist of the following wards of the city of Quebec to wit: St. Sauveur, St. Valier and St. Malo and the village of Stadacona and the municipality of Petite Riviere.
The amendment that is made there consists in the insertion of the village of Stadacona, and the words " the municipality of Petite Riviere." In the Bill sought to be amended it would have appeared that Petite RivRre was a ward instead of a municipality.
I beg also to move an amendment to section 5. The amendment to the existing Act sought to be made is the exclusion from the electoral district of Jacques Cartier of St. Denis ward, which, under the Act passed last year, forms a part of another constituency. The section that dealt with Jacques Cartier in the Bill as introduced was section 5, but it now becomes section 6, because we have taken in two sections to deal with the electoral district of Quebec East and Quebec West. Section 5 has now been struck out, and the following substituted as section 6:
Number 10 (a), the description of the electoral district of Jacques Cartier, is repealed and the following is substituted therefor:
" (a) The electoral district of Jacques Cartier which shall be constituted as at present less the town of Verdun, Outremont, any part of St. Denis ward-
It is intended to exclude the whole of St. Denis ward.


Wilfrid Laurier: If you say "any part," the question would arise "which part"?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It would do no harm to exclude the whole of St. Denis ward. We would then say: "less the town of Verdun, Outremont, St. Denis ward." The only change is to exclude St. Denis ward.


Wilfrid Laurier: The rest is as it is in the Act?


Charles Joseph Doherty: YTes. What was wrong with the Act was that St. Denis ward was not excluded as it should have been. I beg to move that section 6 of the Bill as introduced be struck out, and that the following be substituted as section 7:
Number 14 (a), the description of the electoral district of Hull, is repealed and the following is substituted therefor:
"(a) The electoral district of Hull shall consist of Hull city, East and West Hull, the municipality of South Hull, Gatineau Point, East and West Templeton, the town of Buckingham, the township of Buckingham, the township of Southeast Buckingham, the township of North Templeton, L'Ange Gardien, Portland East and West, Derry, Bowman, Villeneuve East and West, Blake, McGill, B gelow, Wells, Wabassee and Dudley.
The effect of this is to add to the description of Hull, as it stands in the existing law, the townships of South East Buckingham, North Templeton and the municipality of South Hull. As the present Bill was introduced it only provided for the inclusion in Hull of Southeast Buckingham and North Templeton, in addition to those mentioned in the Act as it stood. I understand that it was considered that it properly should include the municipality of South Hull, and I am now moving to include in the description of the electoral district the municipalities of Southeast Buckingham, North Templeton and South Hull. That necesitates amendments in regard to the electoral districts of Labelle and Wright, because these portions which are included in Hull are, under the existing Act, included in Labelle and Wright. Southeast Buckingham is included in Labelle, and North Templeton and South Hull are included in Wright. Therefore, to make the descriptions of Labelle and Wright consistent with these changes, I beg to move that section 8 be as follows:
Number 14 (b), the description of the electoral district of Labelle, is repealed and the following is substituted therefor:
" (b) The electoral district of Labelle which shall be constituted as at present less the town of Buckingham, the township of Buckingham, the township of Southeast Buckingham, L'Ange Gardien,-
etc. The amendment consists in excluding those townships and municipalities which have been put into the electoral district of Hull, and the rest of the description remains the same. Then, section 9 is as follows:
Number 14 (c), the description of the electoral district of Wright is repealed and the following is substituted therefor:

Then follows the description of the electoral district of Wright as it stands at present in the statute, save that we add to the part excluded North Templeton and the municipality of South Hull. I think that completes the corrections in accordance with the agreement come to with respect to the matter.
In the description of the constituency of Jacques Cartier, the draftsman has put in the wording: " less any part of St. Denis ward." Inasmuch as only a part of St. Denis ward was ever included in Jacques Cartier, and we cannot, therefore, take out the whole, I suggest that perhaps the better way is to make the wording:	" less any
part of St. Denis ward at present included-in said county."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Wilfrid Laurier: Is it the intention of my hon. friend to have a large atlas published showing the different constituencies? In 190.3 a very large atlas was issued, and such an atlas is a great help at election time.


Mr. ROGERS:: This matter has already received some consideration, and we will take it up again with a view of adopting the suggestion of my right hon. friend, which is a very good one.
Bill reported and amendments read the first and the second time and concurred in.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Sevigny in the Chair.
Trade and Commerce-Trade commissioners and commercial agents, including expenses in connection with negotiation of treaties or in extension of commercial relations; miscellaneous advertising and printing, or other expenditure connected with the extension of Canadian trade, $150,000.
["When the minister next has his Estimates before the committee he will be expected to give information with respect to the work that Mr. Gobeil, late Deputy Minister of Public Works, has been engaged in for the department.\nAt six o'clock, the House resumed, and then took recess.\nThe House resumed at eight o'clock."]
Wilfrid Laurier: I do not suppose my hon. friend intends to spend very much this year in negotiating commercial treaties, but we shall be glad if he will give us some information as regards the different agencies that we have at the present time. If I am doing him an injustice in stating that I presume he does not intend to negotiate further commercial treaties this year,
I shall be pleased to correct my statement.


George Eulas Foster: This vote is the same as that of last year.


Wilfrid Laurier: Have you any new agencies since last year?


George Eulas Foster: During the past, year certain changes have taken place, and I will very briefly state what they are. In the first place, our trade commissioner in Germany, who had his head office at Hamburg, was caught and interned, and, although he had some degree of personal liberty, he was obliged to report at frequent stated intervals and was kept under very-close surveillance. He did not succeed in getting out until February, when -a transfer was made with a German consul in South Africa, and he arrived at Rotterdam. As throwing a little light on how close the cordon Is drawn as regards news in Germany, I may say that, although he had considerable liberty and had conversations with a great many people, on his arrival at Rotterdam in February he received his first knowledge that a single Canadian had left Canada and had reached either Great Britain or the Continent. That throws some light on the extreme diligence with which the Germans keep information from getting to such a city as Hamburg. After a little rest, which he needed, he will proceed to Russia. I have made arrangements with Mr. Just under which he is to proceed to Russia by way of the north and spend a three or four months' mission in Russia. He speaks German well, and German is a good deal spoken in certain parts of Russia. He does not understand Russian, but with the aid of English and German, I think he will get through the preliminary work very well. Mr. Just is one of our best trade commissioners; has been well trained; is very diligent and active; understands thoroughly not only how to get information but also how to put it in an illustrative and attractive form. He will enter by Petrograd, and make a tour of Russia, visiting the chief centres and gathering all the information he possibly can. After visiting the western Russian cities, he will take in some of those on the Black sea. He will then proceed through the country to Siberia, coming out at Vladi-vostock, and thence come to Canada by way of the Pacific. Having got all the information he can in that time, I propose to have him spend two or three months in Canada visiting the different centres and having conferences with the boards of trade, business men and manufacturers, bringing to them the information he has gained in Russia, and in that way getting the interests of demand and supply close together. He will then be furnished with two assistants, who will be trade commissioners with him, permanently resident in Russia. Although Rus-122i
sia is much perturbed by the war, yet on account of its vast size and immense population, business goes on in great portions of that territory much as it is usually carried on. When the war is over, we.think that Russia will afford a very large field for certain manufacturers and productions of Canada. Siberia itself is an immense country, much the analogue of our Northwest-quite as extensive, and producing much the same. Siberia has been rapidly filling up with immigrants from western Russia; about six hundred thousand a year are pouring into that portion of the country; and it is on the plans of the Russian Government to develop that country with railways as rapidly as it can possibly be done. So that, both from the east and from the west of Russia, there opens up, I think, a good prospect for our trade. Already some of our manufactures have found a large place in Russia. Agricultural implements to the amount of well on to two millions of dollars were exported to Russia during last, year; and, although that trade is somewhat disturbed at the present time for financial and other reasons, that which has been accomplished shows what there is in the field. Then, a certain section of our manufacturing industries believe that there is a large future there for the marketing of railroad supplies of different kinds, particularly cars, and already some of our manufacturing interests have representatives in Petrograd and are pushing business with their usual diligence.
Mr. Lithgow is .still at Rotterdam. I have kept him there because, although there is not a very great deal of commerce possible now between Holland and ourselves, yet that is a very important situation, and Mr. Lithgow gives us valuable information. He is being retained there for the present.
In China, where they have had a very good trade year, although at present and for some months past the country has been a good deal perturbed, I have appointed a trade commissioner, Dr. Ross, formerly of Belleville, or near there. Dr. Ross has been in China for eight or nine years, connected with business operations. He comes highly recommended. He has been at the work for six or seven months, and fias proved very satisfactory so far as gathering and sending information is concerned, and bids fair to make one of our best commissioners.

In Japan, a trade commissioner was appointed, Mr. Johnson, who succeeded Mr. Harris, and he remained until four or five months ago, when, being an officer in the British army, he felt it his duty to go to the front, and he is now on leave of absence, and is either in Great Britain or at the front, I am not sure which. In the meantime his duties are being performed, and very efficiently performed, hy the commercial attache of the British embassy at Yokohoma, Mr. Orowe, with whom I had the pleasure of making acquaintance. He has been .fifteen or sixteen years in that country, is a thoroughly good commercial man, and, what is more to the purpose, has a very large and sympathetic interest with Canada and its development. For the time being, under an arrangement made with the British Government, he is attending to our work in Japan, and is attending to it 'in every .way satisfactorily.
Two of our young trade commissioners are being trained on the new plan which I explained to the House last year. They were first brought into the department, to be made thoroughly familiar with the methods and purposes uf the department, and drilled in all our work, especially in relation to commerce, and also given some training in customs work, so that they might understand the forms and methods of our customs business. Then they are required to visit different places in Canada and gather information and make reports. The two young men to whom I refer have been with us now for eight or nine months. One of these, I have arranged, is to go with Mr. Just to Russia, to be one of the trade commissioners there under him. The other, in due time, will be transferred to some other position as it becomes vacant.
There has been no change in the trade commissionerships in Great Britain, except that our trade commissioner in Leeds resigned and came to Canada to live. Taking his place and doing his work since that time, has been his assistant, Mr. Dwyer, who is thoroughly well versed in the work of his office and has performed his duties fairly well. It is my intention, in time, to combine two or three of the cities in that district and have them under the charge of one of our trade commission* ers, with a central office and with assistants in the other two centres. I think that in that way, with team work of three men, one at the head, we shall get better results

than with independent commissioners, and shall carry on the work more economically as well.
I think it was stated last year that Mr. Harrison Watson had been appointed trade commissioner in London. He has performed that work satisfactorily. In Australia we have Mr. Ross, who was appointed by the late Government, and who is a thoroughly capable and reliable man-one of the best commissioners we have. In New Zealand Mr. Beddoe is still performing the work. Mr. Pouss-ett is still in South America. Last year, having made a tour of all the states in South America the year before, he came to Canada, went over the country from Vic-, toria to Halifax, and held communications with boards of trade, merchants, and others. He has since returned to his work in South America. Mr. Egan, who was transferred from Manchester, has charge of the work in South Africa, with two assistants. In addition to these services, there is an arrangement by which twenty or thirty British consular establishments are at the service of Canadian trade and correspond regularly with the department, giving information, reports and answers to any inquiries made by ourselves or by merchants or business men of Canada. The service in the British West India Islands is about the same as we had last year. Mr. Watson Griffin was appointed to -make a thorough survey of the British West India Islands, Jamaica and Cuba. This he did; his report is now being published in sections in the weekly trade bulletin, and will subsequently be distributed in convenient form. I think that the business community will find his report very interesting and very useful.


Wilfrid Laurier: The information which has just been given to the committee by my hon. friend is very satisfactory, particularly with regard to Russia and1 China. There is every reason to believe that soon after the war is over an enormous trade will spring up between Canada and Russia, and I look to the opening up at no distant date of a line of steamers between Prince Rupert and Vladivostock. What my hon. friend has said about Siberia is quite true; we can supply that part of the country with anything they want in the way of agricultural implements. The attention which my hon. friend is giving to the matter ought to bring good fruit in due time.


George Eulas Foster: The lumber industry of the western part of Canada has

been in rather a bad way, and it has not been helped very much by the war, which has disorganized freights and financial conditions. I think the lumber situation in eastern Canada is locking up. Inquiries which are being received from France, Great Britain and Belgium, indicate a 12 noon, more satisfactory condition in respect of certain kinds of lumber produced by Canada. The condition of things in the West during the last year and a half or two years has contributed to a diminution of building activities, and naturally this has had a very material effect upon a large number of the British Columbia mills. Boards of trade and others have been in correspondence with me with reference to some special means by which they could be helped. Trade commissioners in all countries were instructed to make special investigations in regard to markets for British Columbia lumber, and a very extensive and useful series of reports was sent in. Although this information has been useful, British Columbia felt that its case ought to be specially considered, and after mature consideration I acceded to that suggestion as being reasonable, under the circumstances. Accordingly, I appointed a special commissioner, who will take up his duties in a day or two. He will go from British Columbia to Japan, spending a little time there, and will then proceed to make investigations in China and India. China is now a large consumer of lumber, and when she begins to open up and develop her vast resources, lumber will form a most important item of import. What strikes one as he goes through China is the extreme bareness of the whole country. In years gone by, when the principles of conservation were not applied, the timber was stripped from the country, and to-day almost every hill in China is bare to the top. In the northern and far western portions of the country they have, of course, a considerable amount of timber, but the greater part of that vast country, having done nothing in the way of afforestation or reforestration, must depend upon outside countries for its timber. From India, the commissioner will go to Australia and New Zealand; thence to South Africa or South America, I am not sure which; thence to Great Britain, where he will conclude his investigations. I asked the lumber and forests interests in British Columbia to recommend to me a proper man for this position, and they recommended a Mr. McMillan, recently connected with the Forestry
Department in British Columbia, who was born and educated in Ontario, and who has had a good deal of experience in this line.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: I wish to call the minister's attention just for a moment to the difficulties of the Maritime Provinces in regard to freight. It is very difficult at the present time to get steamers to carry lumber. The most convenient class of vessels that we now have in Canada is the larger class of schooners, which might very well be employed in the trade between eastern Canada and British Columbia. At the present time there is quite a 'demand on the coast of eastern Canada for British Columbia pine. In the town of New Glasgow where I live, large quantities of it are used in the manufacture of cars for our railways; in fact the specifications in some instances do not permit of any other kind of lumber being used for * certain parts of the car. This lumber has to come by rail, and in many cases at a very great expense. What I wish to point out to the minister is that it could come for half the cost by water, provided that the vessels were permitted to carry it down the western coast of Canada and through the Panama Canal. But the great difficulty is that the coasting laws do not permit a captain holding a coasting license to go into those waters. The laws are now so restrictive that a captain with a coasting license cannot take a ship from an eastern port in Canada through the Panama Canal to British Columbia, or vice versa; and I suppose that nine-tenths of these large schooners that I have spoken of are manned by captains holding coasting, and not deep sea, licenses. If my hon. friend had enough influence with the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to get him to remove this difficulty he could do a great deal towards promoting trade between British Columbia and eastern Canada and I think, the eastern ports of the United States as well. That would be a great relief to the shipping people of the Maritime Provinces, who are hampered in their trade not only with the western coast of America, but with South America as well. We are not able to send our vessels down to the River Plate or to Rio or to any of those ports where there is now a profitable business. There is no reason in the world why they should not go there. I think it would be impossible for anyone to furnish a good reason why a captain holding a coasting license should not be allowed to go anywhere

along that coast. Uur captains traded there for a hundred years prior to these new restrictive laws being introduced, and they always succeeded in getting hack and making profitable, voyages. Our captains to-day are just as good men as they were, but' owing to the legislation that has been passed here in regard to coasting voyages they are not able to take advantage of that trade.
There is another question to which I should like to draw the. minister's attention while I am on my feet. Last autumn, after the war broke out, there was eonsider-able discussion in the papers in regard to the prospects of trade in pit props between the ports of Nova Scotia and Great Britain. It was pointed out that owing to the disturbance in Europe the Baltic trade had been cut out, and that the mine owners in Great Britain required large quantities of pit props, and that these might be supplied from Nova Scotia or some other of our Maritime Provinces. A good many people in the Maritime Provinces were interested in that proposal. I am told that my hon. friend has been making some inquiries in regard to it, and 1 am sure that any information he could give to the House and the public as to the prospects of developing a trade in pit props between our ports and Great Britain would be very interesting.
bir GEORGE FOSTER: The matter was taken up by the Department of Trade and Commerce, and a deal of correspondence ensued. It became a matter of very great moment to the mine owners in Great Britain, and they had some conversations with the British Government in regard to it. The result of it all was that a Commission was ajppointel, consisting of representatives of the mine owners and a representative of the British Board of Trade. They came to Canada, and we placed at their disposal all the information and facilities we had. They visited different parts of Canada, taking in Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. They also made a visit to Newfoundland. After they had gathered all their information they made a report which, in the main, followed along this line: the resources wiere ample in Newfoundland and in the portions of Canada that they visited. But some difficulties were apparent. One was the difficulty of freightage, which has been a difficulty in every line of enterprise. Another was that it was impossible for them to lay their hands upon any sufficient supply of 
pit props that were ready for the market. They had then to face this condition: that if contracts were entered into the pit props would have to be cut in Canada during the months of the winter that has just passed, and brought out- for spring and summer transport. Difficulties in two ways cropped up there. No one knew how long the war would last or how soon the Baltic supply would again be accessible-and pit props come from other European countries besides Russia. The trouble then was with making contracts for an indefinite period of time. No one here would like to contract unless he could contract for a year or two years' supply, and the mine owners in Britain did not want to make a contract for one or two years' supply because of the uncertainties of the situation. Some business has taken place; and I think some work has been done during the past winter, but on a somewhat limited scale. The commission also made inquiries in British Columbia, and I believe some busines in pit props has resulted from that part of the country. The commission's report shows that the resources of Canada for the kind of timber have been examined into and found ample. I think that is the main information that I can give my hon. friend.


John Howard Sinclair: Is the minister of the
opinion that the trade could profitably be carried on in times of peace?


George Eulas Foster: That will depend. It is thought that the price of pit props will never again be as low as in the past, and if the price is permanently raised it may make business on this side possible. I have also heard that some of the mine owners are substituting metal props for timber, but that is just an experiment, and whether it can be done economically or not I do not know.


Mr. MACDONALD:: In my county a large number of men are engaged in the coal industry. The difficulty in making contracts was that the gentlemen who came to conduct the business in Nova Scotia insisted that the inspection of the pit props should take place on delivery in England. This wood is in itself not very valuable, and our men reasoned this wAy: suppose we send a ship load of pit props which, after a rigid inspection, are condemned; it would be impossible for us to sell that timber, as it is not used for other purposes, and the venture would be a total loss. From the way in which the business is carried on in connection with our mines, of necessity there must be quite a number of

these pit props rejected from time to time by the local people. The consequence is that men in the business fear to engage in any kind of wholesale way in the delivery of these goods to England. If the parties who are interested in obtaining that trade could arrange for an inspection of timber on this side, I am quite sure that there would be a very much larger supply offered. The business of cutting pit props is not confined simply to the winter season in our province but goes on during all seasons of the year. When there is a good deal of snow it is easy to bring this small wood out on sleds, and the opportunity is therefore taken advantage of, but at the same time the work is going on throughout the year. Having some clients who are engaged in this business, I happen to know that this is their principal difficulty with regard to engaging in this business. If the question of inspection was solved there would be a great deal more of this class of timber offered.


George Eulas Foster: It would be quite possible to solve the question of inspection if other conditions could be made right. My own department would be quite willing to undertake to have the inspecting done on this side, and done under specifications as given on the other side, just as we have done in some other particulars. That could be facilitated if the other conditions couia be made right.


William John Macdonald: If there has been any slackness, that has been the cause of it. You can send deals, or any of the other qualities of lumber that have been going to England, and timber of that class that is found defective in some respects can be disposed of for other purposes, but that condition does not arise in regard to pit props.


Mr. ALFRED THOMPSON:: The discussion relating to the development of our trade with Russia and Siberia is very interesting to me. I agree with what my hon. friend the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir George Foster) and my right hon.- friend the leader of the Opposition (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) have said in regard to the possibility of that trade. For the information of the committee, I might say that about a year ago I travelled with a gentleman from Paris who told me that he, at that time, was arranging to get the capital to put on the North Pacific a line of steamships trading between Vladivostock particularly and our own British Columbia ports. I have no doubt in my mind that the completion of
(the Grand Trunk Pacific will bring to Canada a very large portion of the trade from .Korea, Manchuria and Siberia. It may 'be of interest to the committee to know that, even if this occurred, it would only be a recrudescence of a state of commerce which existed on that coast and between these countries over a hundred years ago. Long before there was a city on the Pacific coast, in California, in Oregon, in Washington, or in our own British Columbia, there was an emporium of Russian trade in the North Pacific at the ancient capital of Alaska known as Sitka. The city of_ Sitka was established in 1799, and 'during the early decades of the last century Sitka was the centre of the Russian trade which supplied the Russian trading posts on the coast and rivers of Alaska and on the Yukon River itself from Behring Sea up the river for a distance of between four hundred and five hundred miles. When the Hudson Bay traders crossed from Hudson bay to the headwaters of the rivers flowing into Behring sea and floated down the Porcupine river on their first trip of discovery, they found, on the lower reaches of the Yukon, the Russian traders there before them. With Alaska, which was then known as Russian America, .and with the coast as far down as the place called Fort Ross, which was within 150 mile-* of the present city of San Francisco, the Russians traded and traded extensively. They bought furs and brought the people engaged in the fur business their supplies. After the transfer of Alaska, or, as it was then called, Russian America, to the United States, which occurred in the same year as our own Confederation, 1867, that trade became practically extinct, and since then there has been very little trade between Alaska, or the North Pacific ports and Russia. However, the trade is there and is capable of being developed in a very extensive way. As a result of the building of the Grand Trunk Pacific railway, the founding of the new city of Prince Rupert, and the establishment of a line of boats from that city to Russian ports, particularly Vladivostock, we shall in a very short time be able to develop a very large and profitable trade.
There is another continent with which I have always felt we have not had as much commerce as we should have had. I refer to the South American continent, and I would like to ask the minister what means we are taking to develop and encourage an interchange of commodities between Canada and that Continent. It is known to the

House that to a very large degree the trade of South America is largely in the hands of European countries-England, Germany, Holland and France. The United States have -not had that trade intercourse with the South American republics that perhaps they might be considered entitled to. It seems to me that the time is opportune for our Government to take cognizance of this fact, and to do everything possible to cultivate commercial relations between Canada and the South American republics, where I am sure there is a great deal of profitable trade to be secured.


George Eulas Foster: Maybe my hon. friend who has just sat down is expecting a word at least in reference to the latter part of his question. I listened, as the committee did, with a great deal of interest to his remarks in reference to Russian trade. The historical reminiscence is a very valuable one, and I hope we shall be able to reproduce the olden trade in much larger proportions. In reference to South America, I stated that one of our Canadian trade commissioners, Mr. Poussett, was instructed, a year and a half ago, to make a complete tour of all the states of the South American continent. He has spent a little more than a year in making a tour of these countries and making a very thorough, and in some respects, minute examination into the conditions of these different states and the possibilities of trade between these states and Canada. His reports have been published widely and supplemented, as I said to the committee a little while ago, by personal visits to different parts of Canada. Mr. Poussett went through our country, spending about four months in visiting all the larger cities. So it remained, and the war intervened. The war, of course, caused dis ocation and difficulties. There is more than simply supplying the demand for the articles to be exchanged in dealing with our trade, or any other country's trade, with South America. There are financial and banking arrangements which seem to be absolutely necessary. At the present time the United States, which has very large resources, which has been very enterprising in reference to South American trade and which has not yet reached a very large measure of success, is up against that difficulty.
It is acknowledged now that what is necessary in order that there may be a remunerative trade and extension of trade between such countries as Canada and the United States and South America, is some form of [Mr. A. Thompson.!
banking and financial arrangement which will put credit and the interchange of money on a fair basis. A great many of these South American states have had to introduce moratoria. They were disappointed in not getting into the European markets, just about the time they were making loans for their own necessities, and they did not get these loans. The state of credit all through South America will take some time to rehabilitate. The' Germans had a system of giving long credits to the merchants, Tunning up to a year and even longer, and that disorganized the business of other countries, and in time led to a large decrease in their trade. But long credits have disadvantages as well as advantages, and in the end I think German trade would have gained no very great advantage. That, however, has been cut clean . across at the present time, and now the' other countries are going in with the idea of not imitating the Germans by giving long credits, and they are trying to arrange banking and financial facilities foi trade. If we are going to do a trade with South America we shall want a direct steamship communication, and that we have not had up to the present. When things begin to settle down, I think this is one of the questions Canada will have to take up.
Trade and Commerce-bounties on lead and crude petroleum; to cover expenditure in connection with the administration of the Act, $7,000.


Wilfrid Laurier: Is the production of petroleum increasing or decreasing?


George Eulas Foster: The bounty paid on lead in 1899, the first year the bounty was operative, was on 449,636,000 pounds, and in 1913, the bounty was paid on 23,985,569 pounds. The bounty, therefore, has largely decreased. The payment of bounty is contingent upon the pricps of lead in the market, and the price of lead in late years has b'-en higher so that the bounty paid has been less. On _ crude petroleum, in 1905, the first year of ' the bounty, the bounty was paid on 23,336,478 gallons, and in 1914 the bounty was paid on 7,824,219 gallons. The bounty on manilla fibre has lapsed. At present there is a prospect, I do not know how far it may go, of petroleum being found in quantities in the Northwest, and that, of course, would have an effect upon the amount of bounty that may have to be paid.

I found out something which I did not know myself before, and which probably the members of the House did not know, and it is rather an important thing. If you look at the statistics of the production of metals in Canada, you will find that lead, to a certain value, and nickel, to a certain value, are put down as the production of Canada. The fact is, taking nickel for example, if nickel is put down in our returns as having a value of so many millions of dollars, it is the value of the nickel, not as it leaves Canada, but after it has gone out and been refined, and when all the labour and interest on capital, etc., is added to it. It is well for us to have that in mind, and I /think it would also be well in future statistics that this shall be thoroughly noted, so that people may not be led away with the idea that the nickel, lead, etc., that is credited to Canada, is really worth that when it leaves the country.


Alfred Thompson: How is this bounty fund administered, as to when and where the bounty is paid? I ask this question because at present we have some very promising silver-lead properties in the Yukon, and they are just beginning to ship the ore. I do not know what percentage of lead this ore contains, but I believe it is pretty high. For the information of the people in the Yukon interested in that industry, I would be glad if the minister would tell us how this bounty money is paid, whether at the mine or at the smelter or when the lead is smelted.


George Eulas Foster: The object of the bounty was to encourage silver-lead smelting, and the smelting of other ores than silver and gold in Canada, so that it is not a bounty upon the ore but a bounty upon the products smelted in Canada.


Mr. TURRIFF:: Has anything been done by the Government towards prohibiting the export of nickel in its raw state or in the matte?	Canada practically controls the
nickel supply of the world, and there has been a great deal of agitation in the newspapers of late in regard to this question. It was brought up in the Ontario legislature, and I would like to know if this Government has been dealing in any way with the question.


George Eulas Foster: If my hon. friend has been interested in nickel and in the controversy that has been going on, he probably knows as much as I do in regard to that question. We have one of the largest, if not the largest, sources of supply of nickel
in the world, and we are the principal exporter of nickel ore and in the matte-mostly in the matte; but the refining of the ore, as well as the ultimate refining of the matte, has up to the present time been done in Great Britain or in the United States. On account of the uses to which nickel is put, the subject, since the war has broken out, has come to a prominence in another way rather than by the mere establishment of an industry in Canada. The Canadian Government, as I think the House has been informed, has been acting in close sympathy and co-operation with the British Government with reference to the ultimate destination of nickel, and an arrangement has been made between the two Governments, which is entirely to the satisfaction of the British Government, towards directing the ultimate destination of nickel refined from Canadian matte or ore. It is not advisable to say just what that arangement is.


John Gillanders Turriff: My information is that
the amount of labour expended on nickel after it reaches the stage of matte, in refining it further to make it fit for commerce, is much greater than the amount of labour expended in mining, roasting and smelting, and that absolutely none of the further refining is done in Canada. The whole nickel industry of Canada, which is, I understand, about 85 per cent of the nickel industry of the world, nickel being found in only one other place, namely, New Caledonia, in the region of Australia, is in the hands of two companies-the Mond Company of England, and the Canada Copper Company of Sudbury, which refines all its products in the United States. I do not suggest that the minister should say anything definite at the present time, but serious consideration should be given to the question whether something cannot be accomplished by which the nickel can be refined in Canada or at least within the British Empire. If that were done, we would have a much better control over the industry. If nickel cannot be procured, proper armour-plate cannot be manufactured; so that the subject is worthy of consideration, both from the war point of view and from the economic point of view, of having many millions of dollars spent in Canada instead of in the United States and Great Britain, especially when we have the whole matter in our own hands.


George Eulas Foster: What my hon.
friend says is in many particulars along my own line of thought. I would think, how-

ever, without having made a study of the question, that when you come to the employment of labour, the major part of the labour expended on nickel is done in our country. When you come to the refining of the nickel, a large part of the expenses is on the equipment and machinery; but not being an expert on that matter, I am not certain. My hon. friend is on the same platform with me in this respect, that we are both in favour of inade-in-Canada.


Mr. OLIVER:: I have received several
petitions asking that the export of nickel be restricted. Possibly the form of the petition emanated originally from the hon. member for South York (Mr. W. F. Maclean). At any rate the petitions have been received. While possibly it is not formal, I would be very glad, if the minister would on behalf of the Government, give in a sentence what would be a fair answer to the petitioners.


George Eulas Foster: I do not remember just what the wording of the petition is, but its object is that steps should be taken ii' possible, by which the nickel, which is found in Canada and the initial processes in regard to which are carried out in Canada, should be further refined in Canada itself, so that the finished article being in Canada might be absolutely under the control of Canada, which it is not now, when it is exported either to the United States or Great Britain. The Government, however, while it has a large interest in that question, has not yet come.to any conclusion, either that nickel should be prohibited from going out in the form of matte to another country, or that the Government itself should undertake the operation or refining it. There are a good many factors to be thought of in the establishment of such an industry, and as to the capital and equipment necessary for it in Canada. I do not think I can give any more formal answer than that.
Trade and Commerce-salaries and contingencies under the Inspection and Sale Act, $3,000.


George Eulas Foster: This vote has
been reduced by $2,000. I have been economical in it; perhaps I have been too economical. Last year we had a vote of $5,000, and we did not expend within $2,000 of it for the inspection we put on and the expenses we incurred, and on the appeal of the Minister of Finance I reduced the vote. I am sorry I reduced it so much.
Trade and Commerce-salaries and contingencies under the Cullers Act, including an amount of $2,000 for superannuated cullers, $9,400.


George Eulas Foster: The committee
will notice the reduction in this item. A reduction occurs each year, because as the old officers who are superannuated pass away, their superannuation allowances do not of course have to be provided for.


Edmond Proulx: Do the cullers contribute to a superannuation fund? -


George Eulas Foster: An arrangement as to the cullers was made some years ago, by which those who were not considered necessary for the carrying on of the work, which is vastly diminished, as my hon. friend knows, and who had been a long while in the service, were put on the superannuation list. I am not quite sure, but I think a slight contribution to the superannuation fund was taken from their salaries.
Census and Statistics, $50,000.


Frank Oliver: There is a reduction here. What is the reason for it?


George Eulas Foster: As the tabulations are finished in the census which was taken in 1911, the help necessary to make these tabulations passes out.


Frank Oliver: Then you actually have one department of the Government that dispenses with services that are not needed any longer?


George Eulas Foster: I try to do that, and some times, especially in times like these, it is pretty difficult to do.


Wilfrid Laurier: The hon. gentleman is not much like his colleagues.


George Eulas Foster: When you have to let temporary employees go after they have been at work for two or three years, and in times like these when many of them have nothing to depend upon, it makes one think carefully and examine closely to see if there is not work to be done. We keep for this work those that are deserving and let the others go. That is what I try to do.
Canada Year Book, $10,000.


Frank Oliver: Is it not possible to bring the publication of the Year Book closer up-to-date? Any issues of the Year Book that I have ever seen have been so far behind that much of their interest and value has been lost. The Year Book is a most valuable compilation, but it loses much of that value by reason of its lateness.


George Eulas Foster: I found that difficulty when I came into office, and I have no doubt hon. gentlemen opposite found it so in their time. The difficulty is not so

much in getting the Year Book ready in time, but, after it is ready, getting it printed on account of the congestion of printing at that season. I am glad to hear the hon. gentleman speak of it as being a valuable work. I have not heard much of it from members of the House, but I hope all have got copies and have looked into it. I think the Year Book shows a great advance in its make-up and material, and we are trying to make a really good Year Book. This year, several new features were added, and I have had very strong commendation of the work from people in other countries as well as people in Canada.


Mr. MURPHY:: Is the material compiled by officers of the hon. gentleman's department?


George Eulas Foster: Yes. It is only right to say, however, that last year I started a system of having a number of monographs upon certain important features of Canadian history, resources or geography, and for these I levy upon the best men I can get outside my own department. For instance, the article in the current Year Book was contributed by Dr. Doughty, who, of course, has done it very nicely.


Mr. LEMIEUX:: What is the subject?


George Eulas Foster: It is on the history of Canada. The idea is to have the geography, the history, and other subjects in relation to the country put into monographs which, while not too long, will yet give the distinctive facts of the subjects treated. Then, the Wear Book being a consecutive publication, next year's volume will refer to the articles in the preceding Year Books, and in the course of years we shall get into the publication, and I trust permanently on record, features in regard to Canada that will be of very great value.


Mr. MARCIL:: How does the minister
arrange about the translation of this book? Is the translation done before the book appears in English, or after?


George Eulas Foster: I am not certain, but 1 think this work is translated in my own department. I have a French translator there, I know.


Charles Marcil: The hon. minister knows the value of having the work out as soon as possible?


George Eulas Foster: Yes, and I try
to do that.
Dominion's Royal Commissions, $15,000.


Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:: It is not likely
that any of this will be spent this year?


George Eulas Foster: I am not so very sure. The Dominion's Royal Commission visited Newfoundland, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia last year and did its work there. It may finish the work in Canada this year. It is under advisement at present, and quite possible-and I think probable- that the Commission will take up their work in Vancouver some time late in summer or early autumn, and will finish the examination of Canada, and then the whole of their work will be finished so far as visiting and examining the countries is concerned.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: May I remind the
hon. minister that he promised the other day to give me information with respect to the steamship service between St. John and Bear River, which was discontinued in 1912? I hope he will be able to tell me that the s.ibsidy will be restored.


George Eulas Foster: Seeing my hon. friend to-day, I was reminded that I was to furnish information on that and on another subject which he mentioned to me. I hope to have the information before, the House closes.


Charles Marcil: As to the Gaspe service, has anything been done?


George Eulas Foster: It is in statu quo.
At one o'clock, the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at three o'clock.
Salaries, rents, wages and contingencies under the Canada Grain Act, $625,000.


Frank Oliver: Will the minister explain the reduction?


George Eulas Foster: The reduction
is really a matter of bookkeeping; it is more apparent than real. Out of last year's vote we had to pay, during a certain part of the year, transport charges on the grain that came into the elevators. This year we do not wish to have a vote for that, as it is being paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund, and re-payments, when made will go into the Consolidated Revenue Fund. The total expenditure last year under this head was $450,737.57, and the expenditure up to February 28, 1915, was $444,945. The expenditure of this year, therefore, will be larger than that of last year, due to the fact that while last year we had only one

elevator at work, the terminal at Port Arthur, this year we will have at work two at Saskatoon and Moosejaw, and, later in the season, one at Calgary, which means that three internal storage elevators have to be provided for this year. The vote includes general expenses of the staff. It takes in salaries of the staff administering the Canada Grain Act, which consists of permanent employees of different grades, and temporary employees who are required for a greater or less portion of the year; internal elevators, in addition to the terminal at Port Arthur; travelling expenses of commissioners; contingencies at the different centres where the officers are working; printing and stationery; general.


Frank Oliver: The minister intimated
that the Calgary elevator will be in operation some time during the season.


George Eulas Foster: Probably by the first of October.


Frank Oliver: What has been the cost
respectively of the terminal elevator and the Saskatoon and Moosejaw elevators?


George Eulas Foster: In round figures: the terminal elevator, $1,300,000; the Saskatoon and Moosejaw elevators, a little more than $1,000,000 each. The terminal elevator has a capacity of 3,250,000 bushels, the Calgary elevator, 2,5Q0,000, and the others 3,500,000.


Frank Oliver: This vote will include the Calgary elevator?


George Eulas Foster: For the portion of the season during which it is operated, yes.


Frank Oliver: How much of this vote
will be required for the operation of each of these elevators?.


George Eulas Foster: One can scarcely tell as yet; we only know what has been paid out up to date. In the Saskatoon elevator we have a superintendent, a clerk, an electrician, a foreman, a weighman, a cleaner and four temporary labourers. The staff at the Moosejaw elevator is about the same.


Frank Oliver: What will be the total
cost, approximately?


George Eulas Foster: So far as salaries are concerned, the superintendent gets $2,500. The salaries of the clerk, electrician, foreman, weighman and cleaner amount to about $475 a month, which,

multiplied by twelve, will give approximately the amount paid out for permanent salaries. Then, whatever temporary help is necessary, and there is always more or less, will have to be added to that.


Frank Oliver: What amount of business was done respectively by the terminal, the Saskatoon and the Moosejaw elevators last year?


George Eulas Foster: I will just give the information generally. The gross earnings of the Dominion Government elevators amounted to $216,795; the direct expenses were $59,304, leaving a gross profit of $157,491; indirect expenses taken therefrom leave a net profit of $148,684. Then there were some little additions to income amounting to $846, making a net income of $149,530.


Frank Oliver: On what turnout of grain?


George Eulas Foster: A trifle over ten million was handled in and out.


John Gillanders Turriff: After allowing interest on the investment, that shows a fairly good profit?


George Eulas Foster: Yes. The cost of the elevator was $1,300,000 in round figures. After a reasonable amount for interest and depreciation has been deducted from that, there is still a fair profit. That was our initial year, and we were charging the rates which prevailed with all the other elevators, and which prevailed up to the end of that year. It was a pretty favourable year in many respects, but we will not know just where we are until we have operated the elevator probably for at least three years. Then we shall be able to strike an average for the seasons. For instance, we shall not handle so much grain this year as last, because there was not so much grain raised, and consequently there is not so much to put through.


Frank Oliver: About what was the total amount of grain put through the terminal elevators at Fort William and Port Arthur last year?


George Eulas Foster: I will first give the figures for the Government terminal elevator:	wheat, 5,278,040 bushels; oats,
1,520,892 bushels; barley, 462,148 bushels; flax, 2,886,990 bushels; rejected grains, 109,813 bushels; making a total of 10,257,883 bushels. I do not appear to have the statement of the figures for the other elevators, although it should be here.


Frank Oliver: Would it be 100,000,000 bushels?


George Eulas Foster: More than that; somewhere around 150,000,000 or 160,000,000 bushels.


Frank Oliver: I just wish to get a general idea of the total output of the Government elevators as compared with the other elevators.


John Gillanders Turriff: How many terminal
elevators are there?


George Eulas Foster: The terminal elevators in the western inspection division have a capacity of 41,050,000 bushels of grain. There is the Canadian Pacific railway elevator at Transcona, the Canadian Pacific Railway elevator "D" at FortWiliiam, and, also at Fort William, the Consolidated Elevator Company, Eastern Terminal Elevator Company, Empire Elevator Company, Fort William Elevator Company, Grand Trunk Pacific Elevator, the Grain Growers' Grain Company, the Ogilvie Flour Mills Company and the elevator of the Western Terminal Elevator Company. These have a capacity of 25,050,000 bushels. At Port Arthur there is the Government elevator, the Port Arthur Elevator Company, Limited, the David Horne elevator, a small elevator, and the Empire elevator, these having a capacity of 15,000,000 bushels, making a total of 41,050,000 bushels. Then there are hospital elevators in the western inspection division with a capacity oi z,130,000 bushels. In the eastern inspection division there are twenty-two elevators with a capacity of
29,850,000	bushels. As showing the number ana capacity of country elevators and warehouses, together with the Ontari. terminal hospital elevators and public elevators in the eastern division, there are 2,607 elevators, 24 warehouses, 1,207 stations, and the total capacity is 154,765,000.


Mr. McCRANEY:: Would the minister make a statement as to the operations of and business done by the Saskatoon elevator?


George Eulas Foster: I can only give my hon. friend a statement up to the time of the last monthly report. That gives a fairly comprehensive view of the operations at Moosejaw and Saskatoon. The Moosejaw elevator started in somewhat handicapped for want of proper power, but it started operations on the 14th October with one engine and about a quarter of the power necessary to run the elevator satisfactorily. On the 1st November the second unit was installed, and these two units,
although there has been some little trouble, have been kept in constant operation. The total amount of grain received from the 14th October to the 14th February, 1914, which is as late as I have the statement for,
Wheat	 Oats	 Barley		Bushels. . 1,642,705 . 442,998 . 12,525 . . 580
Shipped out:	Bushels.
Wheat		. 437,774
Oats		. 62,357
Leaving in store:	Bushels.
Wheat		. 1,220,928
Oats		. 340,641
Together with all the barley was taken in.	and flax that


John Gillanders Turriff: I suppose	a large quantity of that would be wheat which is being held for seed?


George Eulas Foster: A large portion of that was wheat taken in for seed and purchased through the agency for that purpose. The following is a statement of the grain in store and held by the Government for seed purposes:
Bushels.
Wheat	 800,000
Oats	 29,122
Barley	 4,030
That compares with the following quantities held on commercial account:
Bushels.
Wheat	 852,705
Oats	 373,876
Barley	 9,485
Flax	 188
Showing that the commercial operations were considerably larger than the operations for seed wheat purposes. The elevators have done the cleaning and sacking of all the wheat that has been brought into them for seed purposes. In addition to that they have cleaned the screenings and put them into shape for sale to the farmers.


Frank Oliver: When you speak of screenings being put in shape for the farmers, does that include the foul seed?


George Eulas Foster: Yes, that takes in everything that goes into screenings. The weeds are rendered innocuous as far as germination is concerned by being put through the choppers. The province has

a law in reference to that and we have come to an arrangement with the officers of the provincial government. The arrangement as regards that point fills the law and is satisfactory to the provincial authorities. -


Frank Oliver: Is there a local 'demand for the screenings?


George Eulas Foster: Yes, and we provided these choppers so that they could be made available. We commenced sacking for the seed department on February 1 and the following amounts of grain were cleaned and ready for sacking on the date of this statement:
Bushels.
Seed wheat	 250,000
Seed oats	 20,000
The rest of it has been cleaned up since this statement was put in. I think it is now pretty nearly all through the cleaning and sacking process and is being distributed. The elevator is equipped with four automatic baggers with a normal capacity of five bags per minute, equal to an output of 24,000 a day of ten hours. The cleaning is done with Richardson cleaners with a capacity of from 11,000 to 15,000 bushels a day of twenty-four hours. The cleaning machinery has been run night and day on seed wheat in order to get it ready for late winter and early spring delivery.


Frank Oliver: Is there a drying plant connected with the elevator and, if so, what is its capacity?


George Eulas Foster: Yes, there is drying machinery in connection with it. I do not know what the capacity is but the aim is, as it will be in connection with the others, to have the two elevators absolutely perfect as far as equipment is concerned, so that the treatment, drying, cleaning, bagging and chopping may all be carried on at the central depot.


Frank Oliver: In my judgment, probably the most important purpose that the interior elevators could serve would be the drying of damp grain in a season when dampness is the prevailing condition. If my v-iew is correct, it would be necessary that the drying apparatus should be of abnormal capacity as compared with the other functions of the elevator.


George Eulas Foster: That is quite true. Our idea of the use and importance of these internal storage elevators has

somewhat changed since the idea was first conceived, and we see now that they have other uses than the mere storage of grain, for which they will prove very advantageous to the West. In an abnormal season such as the year before last, when there were vast quantities of wet and damp grain, and we ha'd to bring in at Port Arthur a large drying plant from the United States, and thereby save a large proportion of the grain that would otherwise have been almost a total loss, the drying of grain becomes very important. Even if one of these abnormal seasons comes in the course of every four years only it will be found that these internal storage elevators will have proved a great boon to the country by preserving, through drying and treatment, what otherwise would have been lost. The drying machinery will be adequate for all ordinary purposes, but it is arranged so that if the season turns out to be very abnormal, which can be told some weeks before the urgency for treatment arises, it will be very easy to add an extra drying plant.
The Saskatoon elevator was completed on the 5th of October, and it is well to say that both these elevators were not only well constructed, but that they were constructed and opened ahead of the time specified in the contract. The amount of grain received in the Saskatoon elevator, from the 13th of October to February 1st was: wheat, 540,698 bushels; oats, 702,445 bushels; barley, 14,157 bushels. Shipments in bulk have been made out, up to this date, of about one-eighth of the amount of wheat and about one-seventh of tho amount of oats. A large proportion of the wheat and oats was for seed. The cor. mercial wheat in store and shipments out amounted to 177,303 bushels, and of oats 491,779 bushels, showing commercial operations about one-half of the wheat for seed, and twice as much as seed operations in oats. This elevator is equippsd with two automatic baggers of the same capacity as those in Moosejaw, and equalling a total of 12,000 bushels a day of ten hours. They have also cleaning and drying apparatus and are therefore equipped in every way for all the eventualities of grain life in the West.


Frank Oliver: Would the minister make a statement with reference to the amendment made to the Grain Act, which I presume was in response to representations made by the lake carriers in regard to weight on receipt and delivery?


George Eulas Foster: If my hon.
friend has not read the report of the conference with the delegates who visited the Government, I shall be glad to send him a copy. The whole question had its rise in the difficult problem of adjusting the shortages in lake carrying. The shipper puts his grain into the hands of the Government at Fort William, and it goes into the Government elevator or into elevators which are supervised by the Government. The shipper has no power inside of these elevators; his grain is delivered in trust to these warehouse men. When the grain is ordered out of the warehouse it is weighed out by the elevator into the boat, and the shipper has nothing to do with that operation, which is under Government supervision, or under Government management. The weight of the grain that is put in the vessel is therefore given by the Government weighman, and with that grain and that weight the carrier goes on his journey to the eastern elevator. The grain is then weighed out into the eastern elevator, but it is weighed out without Government weighmen and without Government supervision; it is weighed in by the elevator itself into its elevator. If that weight and the weight given at Fort William should agree, there i^ no trouble between the carrier and the elevator, but if the weight given by the in-weighing or receiving elevator is 1,000 bushels short, then, under past conditions, the carrier liad to make up that shortage. The carrier reasoned in this way: that he received from the Government a certain weight of grain at Fort William, that he did not throw it overboard or lose it in any way; but when it was weighed in at the eastern elevator it was short, although he contends that he delivered to the receiving elevator just as much as he got at the loading elevator. Consequently, he demurred against the payment of the shortage. His ground of attack was, that there must be something wrong with the weighing at the loading elevator, or there must be something wrong with the weighing at the unloading elevator. That is the basis of the dispute. The carriers met in convention and came to the conclusion that in this year particularly, having had some heavy losses, and having had all this trouble for years, they would protect themselves by a bill of lading, the essence of which would be that they would not contract with the shipper to make good the shortage, although they would contract to allow a certain percentage as a donation towards this shortage, and
beyond that they would not go. They would not make contracts with the shippers except upon that new or modified bill of lading. The shippers did not accede to that arrangement, and took the ground that they were out of it as far as the lake transit was concerned-that, their grain having been delivered to the Government or Government-supervised elevators, and the grain being weighed out to them, the weight was presumably right, and they should not be held responsible. Therefore they refused to go in with the purpose of that bill of lading. Then, it was thought that if all these people would get together, they might come to some fair arrangement to test out some method by which the shortage could be arranged for each year without the multiplied troubles. It ended in this, that the outloading elevators and the lake carriers were prepared to give contributions towards a shortage fund, to ensure the receiving elevators against losses. If there were any losses greater than this fund made up, then they would stand that part of the shortage themselves. A conference of the carriers and eilevatormen was held lately in my office, and it was pretty representative. Those who were represented there came to an agreement practically on that basis, and I had hopes that the whole thing would have been settled for this year. The idea was to try out that arrangement for one year; if'it worked well, it could be kept on, and if it did not work satisfactorily some other means could be devised. The long and the short of it was that in getting the different representatives from all parts of the country to sign the agreement-the assent of each one was essential to the carrying out of the scheme-delays took place, and I asked them to come together again to see whether we could not come to a final agreement, sign up, and have the whole matter arranged. A number of them came; but it was not a representative meeting. The result is that the situation is about the same as it was before. The question is now engaging the consideration of the officers of my department and of the Government, and before the session closes I hope to bring in an amendment to the ' Act .which will provide some satisfactory way of disposing of shortages, so as to settle the question, if we possibly can, and not have the perennial disputes and troubles and inconveniences which arise from the condition of things that has existed in the past. The shippers, the outloaders and the carriers are agree-

able to haying such an amendment; the objection comes from some of the eastern elevators.
Mr. OLIVER; Has the amending Bill not been put through?


George Eulas Foster: No. I introduced two amendments into the Senate, when I had hopes that this arrangement by agreement would be made as to the shortages. That Bill has come to the House; and, if any further legislation is necessary, as I think it will be, it will be brought in as an amendment to that Bill, so that when it comes before the House, the three questions will be before us, and then the result can be submitted to the Senate and the legislation finished.


Frank Oliver: As I understood the terms of the Bill that came from the Senate, the question of shortage was put squarely up to the carriers.


George Eulas Foster: There was nothing in the Bill with reference to that directly. The Bill had two amendments, one of which was regarding the certificate of weight at Fort William, as given by the Government weighman. At Fort William you have the shipper and the elevator and the vesselman, and some one has to say what weight is put into a vessel. As the Government system of supervision, if I may so say, seems to be rather better than the system of supervision at other elevators, it was the opinion that the weight ascertained and given by or under the supervision of the Government should be the weight that should be taken as final, and that weight would be put up to the receiving elevator. That would not mean that the receiving elevator would have no recourse after that, but that would settle the weight until, by process of investigation by the grain board, before which the matter could go, or further by the courts, if it went to the courts, an ultimate decision could be had.


Frank Oliver: As I read the Bill, it seemed to me that if a carrier, having received a certain amount of grain under the supervision of the Government, did not deliver that amount to the receiving elevator, he was absolutely responsible.


George Eulas Foster: He read it, and it was his duty to deliver it to the receiving .elevator. The whole point is that, the Government having fixed the weight, it is supposed to be the proper .weight and the weight which the carrier must deliver. There might be inaccuracies in weighing

the grain at the receiving elevator, and they would have to be determined.


John Gillanders Turriff: As I understand the
matter, the Government has officials, not only at the Government elevators, but at all the other elevators doing business at the head of the lakes. Does the Government hold itself responsible for the correct or proper delivering of the grain from the time it is weighed in one of the large terminal elevators until it is transmitted into the hold of a vessel? The wheat is weighed in large hoppers; it has then in most cases to be elevated and to go through quite a system of spouts before it gets into the hold of the vessel, and there may be leakage in many ways. When the Government weigher gives a certificate, is he responsible that the amount of grain goes into the vessel, or is he simply giving a certificate that he has weighed a certain amount of grain?


George Eulas Foster: Take the Government elevator first. When grain comes to a Government elevator, it is taken out of the hands of the shipper there. It is weighed out into the elevator, and the Government elevator is responsible for every pound of grain that goes in; it is responsible for delivering an equal quantity of grain both in weight and in grade; if the grain is spirited out of the elevator in any way, that is to the loss of the elevator. The grain remains in the elevator until it is ordered out, and then the Government officials in the elevator weigh it out, spout it out and supervise it as it goes into the hold of the vessel. They have to weigh out just as much as they take in. If they cannot do that, they have to stand that loss. After it once gets into the hold of the vessel the Government is not responsible for what takes place; it is then the carrier's loss.
Mr TURRIFF- That would not cover the point I want to get at. Take the case of a terminal elevator other than the Government elevator. There is a Government weigher, and he turns, say, 10,000 bushels of wheat on the scales and gives a certificate to that effect. Does the Government hold itself responsible that all of that 10,000 bushels gets to the hold of the vessel? Because, it is quite possible that grain can be switched between the scale hopper and the hold of the vessel.


George Eulas Foster: Then, that would be the loss of the elevator if such loss was -due to its negligence.

1M5


Frank Oliver: I am not quite so sure. The Grain Act as it stands provides that the weight given by the Government is the weight; but the amendment that has been brought before the House says that the weight as given by the Government shall be the weight in law. ,


George Eulas Foster: What is that?


Frank Oliver: I say, I do not think the conclusion of my hon. friend from Assini-boia (Mr. Turriff) as stated is the correct one. The present law says that the weight given by the Government elevator is the weight. That leaves it a matter to be ultimately decided whether that weight was the lawful weight or not. But, under the amending Bill before the House, it is proposed to say, not only that that is the weight but that it is the lawful weight-that is, there is no recourse as against the weight given by the weigher.
bir GEORGE FOSTER:	It may be that
I can save my hon. friend some argument on that score. He is speaking of the amendment as it came to the House?


Frank Oliver: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: That amendment does not express the view of the Department or of the Government. It got in a little wrong, and that was not noticed in the Senate. So, when it comes before the House there is to be an amendment.
I think I shall have to ask my hon. friend from Assiniboia (Mr. Turriff) to repeat his 'question to which I gave an answer. It may be that I did not quite understand his question, or it may be that he did not understand my answer; or maybe his question is right and my answer is not right, and I want to have it right.


John Gillanders Turriff: From the information I have received on the subject, I am led to infer that weighers may not be always as correct as they might be. Also that information leads me to point out that discrepancies might occur between the time the wheat is weighed and the 4 p.m. time it arrives in the vessel.
I assume that in a Government elevator matters go more nearly correct than in an ordinary commercial elevator. But in an ordinary commercial elevator the Government puts in official v eighers. Take the case of such an elevator, and a shipment, say, of 10,000 bushels of wheat, is ordered' out. The 123
Government weigher weighs that wheat and it is sent to the hold of the vessel. But what ,1 am asking is: Does the Government hold itself responsible that it is
10,000	bushels of wheat that is weighed out by their own weigher, or does the Government see to it that every bushel of that 10,000 bushels gets to the hold of the vessel ? It is shipped as 10,000 bushels; but from the weigh-scale hopper in the elevator to the hold of the vessel that wheat has to be elevated, and lowered, and switched around to a very considerable extent, more particularly in the old elevators built fifteen or twenty years ago. So, I am trying to find out if the Government looks after that wheat from the time it leaves the scale hopper to the time it gets to the hold of the vessel.


George Eulas Foster: The Government receives the grain, as I stated before. The grain is ordered out, and they weigh it. They weigh out the exact quantity that is ordered. Now, after it passes the weigh-scale, my hon. friend wants to know whether the 'Government sees to it that every grain of that is carried into the hold and gets +bere-


John Gillanders Turriff: Every bushel-yes.


George Eulas Foster: -and whether, if every bushel does not get into the hold, the Government is responsible for all that does not get in. I have asked that question of Dr. Magill, and have given him the facts, and have asked him to write out a statement, so that there may be no question about it. What he has written is as follows :
1.	The inspector drops an electric light into the shipping bin, to see that the bin is emptied into the hold.
That is the first thing that is done.
2.	An officer stands on the dock and sees the spouts handled, and shakes them out. The inspectors watch the belts and number the shipping bins for each boat.
These are the precautions which the Government takes in its own elevators with its own men; and these are the precautions which are taken in every elevator that loads out at Fort William. If anything goes wr.mg and it is between the weighing-scales and the hold of the vessel, and it is possible for this inspection and supervision to spot it, then, of course, the responsibility falls on the elevator, and they would be made to, as we say, " pony



up." But with the Government elevator nothing is supposed to go wrong.


Frank Oliver: Why is it that'while the Government supervise the weighing and delivery of all outgoing grain from the terminal elevators, they do not supervise the transfer of grain from the hold of the vessel to the eastern receiving elevator?


George Eulas Foster: The bent of the department and its administration being towards a proper inspection and certification of grain, as the years have passed by that inspection and certification has been brought to a state of efficiency which, perhaps, we shall not be able to exceed, taking the human element into account. But it is equally important-and, in some cases, more important-that attention should be given to the weighing of the grain, because if the weight is defective the farmer and the shipper may lose large amounts on large transactions. There are difficulties in connection with the weighing of grain. The grain is weighed in, we will say, at a country elevator; then it goes to Winnipeg, and, ultimately, to Fort William, where it comes under the supervision of government weighmen. The scales in all country elevators are under the control of the Inland Revenue Department, and inspection of them, is, therefore, carried out by that department. Up to the present time inspection has been made about once a year, and my hon. friend knows how easy it is for scales to get out of order.


Frank Oliver: When the Estimates of
the Minister of Inland Revenue were under consideration, I drew his attention pointedly to that condition.


George Eulas Foster: That has been
taken up, to a certain extent, by the two departments concerned. I have no hesitation in saying that it would conduce to the efficiency of the service if both these operations were under the control of one department, that department naturally being the one which has the most to do with the grain. So far, we have not decided to do that, but certain steps have been taken in the matter. In the first place, the Inland Revenue Department has arranged for more frequent and more thorough inspections of the scales in the western division, including the elevators at the terminals. In the second place, we have ourselves obtained from tne Inland Revenue Department authority to inspect and supervise the scales in the terminals at Fort William. The chief weighmaster at
[Sir G. E. Foster.'
this terminal-he	is a	scalemaker,
knows all about scales, and is a very energetic and efficient man-has supervision of all scales at Fort William. The weighing at Fort William has been greatly improved within the last year or two, and, I dare say, is susceptible of staid further improvement. At first attention was directed chiefly to the West, the centre and source of the grain, but gradually it became apparent that something would have to be done in the East as well in order to make the system continuously efficient. Eastern inspection and weighing, particularly the weighing, has not been under the supervision of the Government to the extent that it ought to have been. There is no Government weighing-out from the vessels into the receiving elevator; we do employ weighmen in some eastern elevators who supervise the weighing-out from the receiving elevators into the cars. An Order in Council was passed last year which looked towards bringing the eastern system, in respect of weights particularly, into conformity with the western system. The matter is complicated a little by the fact that the elevator systems of the East differ from those of the West; the Harbour Commissioners have their elevators and manage them, and , it takes a little time to get all these interests in agreement and in accord, so that the system shall be made to work smor.') ly and efficiently all the way through. I hope, however, that before another session of Parliament is held, our efforts in that direction will have resulted in the securing of a more uniform and efficient system.


Mr. W. H. BENNETT:: I cannot understand why there should be many shortages at the eastern elevators. If a vessel has
100,000	bushels of grain for an eastern elevator, exactly that amount is bound to be delivered, and the mate goes up to the weigh scales- and checks the amount very closely in order to establish that the requisite amount of grain has been delivered. You have, therefore, that first check on the part of the vessel owner. In order to avoid dispute between the owner of the vessel and himself, the owner of the elevator also has a man there to check the incoming quantity of grain; that is check No. 2. These elevators, contain a great many bins, the capacity of each bin being from 20,000 to 50,000 bushels of grain, and a cargo of say 100,000 bushels of grain can be placed in two or three bins.
There is in the office-and I know this

from living where there are elevators-a model so to speak which shows exactly the grain of each vessel, and the numbers of the bins in which it is distribued. We will assume that John Brown of Peterborough owns a hundred thousand bushels that came on the steamer Rosedale. That grain is deposited, in bins 1, 2, 3 and 4, we will suppose. The bins may not all be full, but each contains part of the grain. Now when the order comes in to ship that grain it is drawn from the elevator in cars, and it is there that the Government weighman comes in to see that the right quantity goes into the cars. The grain drops out of all elevators from the bottom, and when the four bins are empty that proves that all the grain of John Brown, or whoever it is, has has gone out. If there is not enough grain to fill John Brown's order, the vendor can very speedily get an inquiry into the matter, and unless the grain has been there for a considerable length ot ume the shortage, if any, is easily ascertained. I live where there are elevators, but I do not think there are a great many shortages after all, and some that I have heard of were-say 500 bushels out. That meant that the tallyman had forgotten one tally. Of course the shortage might be only 200 bushels; that depends on the scale. But the grain is very well watched both by the owner of the vessel and the owner of the elevator.


John Gillanders Turriff: The discussion so far has been largely, 1 imagine, on the outgoing weighing from the terminal elevators. The efforts that have been made by the Minister of Trade and Commerce are in the right direction, and I tnink the system is being gradually improved, and that before long it ought to be very complete. There is, however, a considerable amount of complaint about the weighing of wheat at the original elevator where the farmer places it, and at the terminal elevators at the head of the lakes, and possibly the present will be as good a time to discuss this matter as on the amending Bill that my hon. friend is bringing in-. I do not know that I can do better than read a letter on the subject that I have just received, and that seems to me very much to the point. It shows -what the difficulties and the losses are, and gives the writer's opinion how they could best be avoided. The letter is from Mr. D. D. Campbell, Room 246, Grain Exchange^ Winnipeg, Manitoba, and is dated January 13, 1915:
J. G. Tuiriff, M.P.,
Ottawa, Ont.
Dear Siir:
I see that It is expected that the Dominion House will soon open for business, and I understand that there are likely to be some changes made in the Grain Act, and it is possible that the Board of Grain Commissioners may be asking for more power to be given them in dealing with matters that may be all right in some cases, but if I had an hour's talk with you I think I could convince you that there never was a time when more definite action is necessary in securing redress from the errors that are continually occurring, especially in weights, both of car lots, and also in cargo lots.	'
The farmers and dealers in the West have far more reason to start a rebellion over the weights they are receiving for their grain than there was for tTTe war which is now raging in Europe. You may say we have the Grain Commission to apply to, and in reply I say we have applied to them, but without results, as the facts which I will state will go to prove. I say without fear of successful contradiction, that conditions never were so bad as they are at the present time, and I have been closely in touch with the grain handling for the past thirty years.
A little over a year ago I took up the work of collecting claims for different grain firms, and also for farmers that desired my assistance, and in that time I have secured adjustments in Weight for the following amounts of grain, by proving to the satisfaction of those in charge that the weights as issued were not correct.
I secured 20,000 pounds of wheat, 10,000 po mds of wheat, 404 bushels of flax, 466.28 bushels of oats, 234 bushels of oats, 95 bushels of flax, 13 6 bushels of wheat, 100 bushels of wheat, 1.3.40 bushels of wheat, 55 bushels of wheat; and I could name a good many more on which I have received adjustments. But sem; of the terminals refuse to make any adjustment, even though the facts are very clear that an error has occurred, hut shield themselves behind the so-called Government weight. And the recent investigations that have been held in regard to cargo lots show*, that some cargoes had thousands of bushels over in weight, and others were found to be short to a large extent.
In fact conditions have got so bad that the railway companies are taking the stand that terminal weights cannot be relied on, and refuse to pay claims for shortages in weight, even where weights have been sworn to as the car was loaded-unless the car has been seen leaking in transit. As an example, I have seven cars which were all handled in about ten days The grain was weighed in by Govern-, ment weight at St. Boniface, and weighed off at Fort William by Government weight; and the shortage on the seven cars is 14,330 pounds. This occurred nearly a year ago, but the claims are not paid yet,
I think the foregoing will clearly show that there is something wrong. What is the remedy? I am prepared to admit that J. G. White, the chief weighmaster at Fort William, is one of the best scale experts in Canada, but I think the facts which I have given show clearly that it is not the scales that cause the errors, but the connections getting the grain

to and from the scales, by the men in charge. Yo i know from practical experience that there is not much to be gained in having good hooks on a chain, unless every link is capable of standing the strain; as the strength of any chain is its weakest link. I claim that we are not paying salaries enough to get men of the right type to take up this work. I claim that there is not a bank manager in Fort William that has any more responsible position than the weighman in one of the large terminal elevators. Note the conditions under which they work and the salaries paid. Is it any wonder that we are not securing accurate weights?
We require a Dominion Utilities Commissioner. with full power to inquire into all troubles arising between the railways and the terjninal elevators, who would have full power to give a ruling- as to where the responsibility rests, and order an adjustment of same. For the average shipper cannot afford to stand a suit in court with a large corporation. I will state a few cases as an example:
A farmer loads 1,100 bushels into a car, and has kept correct record of his weights. The record taken in passing Winnipeg by the Inspection Department goes to show that the car contained the amount claimed. When the car is placed at the elevator for unloading, the record shows that one of the seals on the door of the car is gone, and the outturn of the car is over 100 bushels short. The railway company refuse to pay the claim on the ground that their records show sign of leak or damage in transit, and they claim the car was sealed when placed on the elevator siding. Who is responsible for the loss?
A car is loaded with oats, in Alberta, and consigned to Montreal. This car was first handled by the Grand Trunk Pacific railway, as far as Fort William, and taken to Montreal by the Canadian Pacific railway. The outturn shows a loss of nearly $200. Both railways decline any responsibility for the loss on the ground that there was no record of leak while the car was in their possession.
At the time that this car was handled, there was a clause in the Grain Act, as follows: "No grain shall leave a public terminal point without being officially weighed, unless the owner or his agent orders otherwise.".
This car was not weighed, and the Grand Trunk Pacific claim that if it was to be waighed it would be the Canadian Pacific railway that should attend to the weighing, and the Canadian Pacific railway claim that the weighing should have been done by the Grand Trunk Pacific railway. This car was handled in 1913 and is not settled yet.
A car of flax loaded in Saskatchewan and consigned to Fort William was noted on arrival at Winnipeg to have been loaded to the wheat line, which is 65 inches high (or supposed to be). On arrival at Fort William the record was taken on two occasions as being 67 inches deep, which is slightly more than thft record taken at Winnipeg. The record shows that this car arrived at destination with \ one of the doors unsealed. The car was unloaded, and the weight given as 61,800 pounds, which is altogether too light a weight for either 65 or 67 inches of flax, and the record of depth is changed to 47 inches by writing a four over the six. The weight sheet shows this car to have been loaded 67 inches deep, and the
[Mr. Turriff.J
Canadian Pacific railway refuse to pay the loss claimed on the ground that the record of the car shows that they delivered the flax to the elevator, and the Elevator Company refuse to make good the loss, on the plea that the record of 47 inches which was arrived at after the car was unloaded is correct. Loss claimed is $429.70.
It is possible that the Board of Grain Commissioners may ask for authority to give a ruling in cases of this kind, but I do not think that it will be consistent, as they would be simply giving a decision on the work done by their own employees, and the last case stated here occurred at the Government elevator, which is operated by the Board of Grain Commissioners. So I think you will see that we require an independent party to decide where the responsibility rests, and whose decision would be final and binding on all concerned.
If it is necessary to secure redress, raise the weighing and inspection charges to $1 for each. That will amount to less than a quarter of a cent per bushel, and if we can secure accuracy by doing so, by all means let us have it.
I presume that will be $1 for each car.
While acting as shippers' agent, I took the ground that we were not paying sufficient salaries to secure the best men. There is twice as much work and three times the responsibility in weighing and inspecting a car as there is in selling it on commission, and at present we pay for weighing 30 cents per car, and 50 cents for inspecting it, and we pay our commission firm, say from $10 to $20, and no one begrudges the commission firm their charge if they look well after the selling of same.
There is no reason why this matter cannot be overcome if it is gone' after in the proper manner.
You will see that this has reference more particularly to the case of dealers and farmers. Dealers are in a much better position than farmers to secure redress for anything that is wrong. In the first place, the railway companies are much more likely to make a fair settlement with a large firm of dealers, or the big millers, than with the individual farmer. In the second place, the dealers and millers are wealthy corporations as a rule, and they are in shape to put up a big fight in the courts if they do not get a fair settlement. On the other hand, a farmer who has suffered a loss of $100, or $400 or $500, is bandied about from one railway company to another, from one elevator company to another, or from an elevator company to a railway company, and under these circumstances, what possible chance has he tc get a fair settlement of his claim? He cannot possibly get a settlement unless he takes the case into court, and there is not one farmer in a hundred who would want to do that. There are very few farmers who would be in a position to do it. It might

cost a good deal more to collect $100 or $200 than the amount collected. This writer suggests that there should be an independent authority appointed to deal with these matter?. It seems to me that there is something in his contention. He mentions eases, and he is prepared to supply the necessary proof in every case, where claims have been outstanding since 1913 and are not settled yet. It seems to me that this is not fair, and if my bon. friend would take this matter up, even now before his amended Bill goes through, something might be done to overcome the difficulties. You will notice that the writer of this letter thinks that it is not the Board of Grain Commissioners who should deal with these matters. There is a good deal of reason in what he says; they would simply be siting in judgment on their own employees. That should not perhaps be given too much weight to, but at the same time there is something in it. A man who would be absolutely independent after all would probably be better able to arrive at what is fair and right than anybody else. I have known the writer of this letter for the last thirty-six years. We settled on adjoining sections in the year 1878, some thirty-six years ago. I have known him intimately ever since, and I am sure my hon. friend the member for Lisgar (Mr. W. H. Sharpe) will bear me out when I say that D. D. Campbell is as straightforward and as reliable a man as there is in Canada. He is thoroughly well posted in this business, and I would ask the minister to give every possible consideration to the suggestion he makes, and that if possible, when he comes to take up his Bill to amend the Grain Act, he shall do something along the lines suggested, more particularly in the interest of the farmer and of the individual shipper, as he is not in as good a position to look after his own interest as is the grain dealer or miller.


George Eulas Foster: The hon. member who has just spoken was good enough to allow me to see the letter yesterday, and I had an opportunity of reading it over. He has read it to the committee, and it will go upon the record and will be there for further reference and consideration. There are two remarks in the letter which would lead me to think that as good a man as Mr. Campbell is, he is carried away a little by his fervour, -wherein he says that conditions were never as bad as now, and also that they are so bad that
they would be as much a justification for a-rebellion in the West as are the grounds on which the present war is being waged by the Allies against their enemies. This is more, I think, for the purpose of attracting attention than to be regarded as a statement of fact. My officers on the ground and the members of the commission, I think, have at heart the best interests of the farmers of the West in respect to all these things.


John Gillanders Turriff: There is no doubt about that at all.


George Eulas Foster: They have very carefully watched the matter and have improved methods in every possible way. Their statement to me is that last year showed less grievances and complaints than any preceding year, not only with reference to leakages and weights and certificates and loading platforms and car shortage, but also . in regard to every other thing that comes up as a difficulty in this great transportation system. I should be inclined to take the testimony of men who are every day looking over the whole field, rather than that of my friend who wrote the letter, and who sees, as it were, just a confined area, and has his eye particularly upon his own line of redress of grievances. Consider the human element that enters into it: you have railway systems of tens of thousands of miles stretching from the Rocky Mountains to the Lakes, and on every one of these systems are cars which carry grain, and the cars- may be of wood and other perishable material, and there are good cars and cars that are not so good, and there will be accidents, leakages, and times when the man who breaks the seal and makes inspection forgets to put the seal on again. All these 'things occur, and so long as the human element enters into it, they will occur. It is for us to see that there is the necessary efficient supervision, and we can strengthen the supervision and method by which grievances are to be met and complaints are to be investigated, and we can come to greater perfection, but I do not expect that we will ever arrive at a time in the transportation of grain when everybody will be bereft of a grievance. I do not think my hon. friend (Mr. Turriff) would live in the West fifteen minutes if he did not have some little grievance he could get hold of now and then, in order to keep him alive and quicken his activities.


John Gillanders Turriff: We do not have to look far for grievances.


George Eulas Foster: I am not finding fault. The Grain Commission, with the full approval of the department, has been bending its energies to the improvement of the weighing system and to the status of the weighmen. The inspecting system has been brought to a very good standard, and now the weighmen have to be looked after. We found the weighmen all temporary employees, with no certainty of how long they would be employed. We found that when the number of men who offered themselves were all combed over to get the best of them for inspectors, the remainder were thought good enough to be weighmen. We have changed that and we are making the weighman a permanent rather than a temporary Officer.


John Gillanders Turriff: That is good.


George Eulas Foster: The salaries we pay them may not be high, but we have fixed a minimum and a maximum, the minimum being $75 a month and the maxi- [DOT] mum $100 .a month, and if they prove satisfactory their salaries are gradually increased from the minimum to the maximum. They are therefore very much better off than they were before, and we are getting every year a better class of weighmen. Again the human element comes in and mistakes will be made. With reference to these seven cars that went from St. Boniface down to Fort William, I can tell my hon. friend that we might possibly avoid any mistake if at St. Boniface we could see that every grain went into the cars, and if we put a man at the head of the car and another at the taxi of the car, and got them to keep track and watch the sides of the car until it got to Fort William, and then saw that every grain of that get into the elevator was, weighed at Fort William. In that way you would have supervision all the way through and you might come near perfection, but of course that process is impossible. I do not know that the time will ever come when a corporation will pay all claims until it is compelled to, and no man likes to pay until he makes certain that he ought to pay. To remedy these difficulties the writer of the letter says that a man should be appointed who would be an autocrat and a czar, and that when he investigates, the Canadian Pacific railway and the Grand Trunk Pacific, and the elevators, have got to do just as he says and make restitution as he declares. It goes a long way to say that the one man shall investigate and pass sentence, and leave no recourse to the

other party for appeal or for courts of law. We have to be pretty careful as to how far we should go in that direction. Our commission could have these complaints made to them and they coidd investigate and they could report, but they have no power to enforce, and it is a pretty grave question as to whether you should give any man or any body of men the absolute right just of themselves to say to other parties what they should do in certain cases, without leaving the other parties any recourse of appeal. I would be glad if it could be made possible that none of these difficulties would occxir, but after all we can only take a comparative view. These are the points that the writer of the letter passes upon, that came within his experience, but count them all up and how few they are in comparison with the innumerable transactions that take place in grain every year in Canada. That does not say that there may be a good many claims that are not brought to the surface, and which would swell that number. It is always a right thing for a minister to say that he will look into the circumstances and that he will take into consideration whatever view is placed before him, and he ought to do it and to do it honestly. If he finds there is anything in a suggestion which car. be practically carried out, it is his duty to try and do it, and he must exercise his judgment in that respect. I know that Mr. Campbell was once in the employ of the Government in this class of business, and his work came ixnder my notice, and so far as his work is concerned I think it was done conscientiously and with a desire to do his whole duty.


John Gillanders Turriff: If the recommendations which Mr. Campbell makes were carried out, it would cut away his business, so that he cannot be making them from any personal motive. I have every confidence in the way in which the minister is endeavouring to help matters along in that respect, and I have every confidence that he is doing his best to get the law into good shape so that if the farmers do make a loss they will have their remedy. I still think that in the case of the seven cars there ought to be a decision one way or the other long before thi3.


George Eulas Foster: , I quite agree. Of course, as to the management of the interior terminal elevators it is so far an ex-pei'iment. These elevators have a capacity of 3,500,000 bushels of grain storage, and the object is to get the farmers of that part of the country interested in these elevators so


as to study out what possible advantage they may be to them. In order to facilitate that, one of our travelling inspectors, who as regards grain has little to do in the winter months, has been making a tour of the Northwest provinces. He has a nice set of lantern slides which show the construction of the elevators and their workings and give general representations of the mechanical conditions -of the transport system. He calls meetings and exhibits the lantern slides and gives the farmers present an address upon the storage elevators-what they are designed for, what it is proposed to do with them, and in' what way the farmers may make use of them to their own advantage.
I am informed that these meetings are attended with very great interest by large numbers of the farmers. We are also sending out little illustrated pamphlets about the working of our elevators, with the terms, etc., to the farmers of the West, all with the idea of getting the 'farmers to focus their attention upon the Government elevators to see of what use they may be to them. The management is arranging the fees and charges in such a way as to make it an inducement to the farmer to send his grain to the Government elevators. In the arranging of the fees and charges we are for the present absorbing the stop-over charge in the transport system; and, when you take our line of charges, it is possible for the western farmer to put his grain into the storage elevator and have it remain there for 45 days, and then send it forward to our elevator at Fort William and have it transferred to that elevator, all at a total charge which is less than it will cost him to send his grain through the elevators directly to a terminal elevator at Fort William. We think, when that is fully understood, it will have two results. In the first place, [DOT] it will have this best result: it will give an opportunity to the farmer to avail himself of a space of time for the storage of his grain and prevent him from throwing it absolutely and quickly upon the market when it is threshed, because he has no opportunity for storing it. It will thus conduce gradually to the conservation of grain from being rushed on to the market too quickly and sold, thus diminishing the prices which are offered. It offers this inducement also to the farmer, that he can have his grain cleaned and treated and, if it is out of condition, put into condition, all at a comparatively low rate. These are some of the advantages
which we are offering to the farmers in connection with the internal storage elevators.


Frank Oliver: There is nothing to be
said in condemnation of the idea of the minister to give all publicity possible to whatever advantages there may be in the existence of these internal storage elevators; but the condition remains as it was in the beginning that in the exceptional year the elevators will be used largely, and in the ordinary years they will be used very little, as in the case of the present year as shown by the returns that my hon. friend has given. With three railroad systems operating four tracks to Lake Superior during the summer and three tracks to tide-water during the winter, the conditions which existed some years ago and which were made the original basis of the idea of establishing interior terminal elevators, will have been radically changed; so that whatever reasons there may have been some years ago for the establishment of these storage elevators for storage purposes, those reasons are not now so strong to-day as they were then. I am not finding fault with the Government for establishing the elevators. They will be found to be of use in the exceptional year, but they are not a substitution, nor can they ever be made a substitution in any sense for the original demand made on behalf of the farmers for Governmentjowiiership of all the terminal elevators at Lake Superior.
I wish to say a word in regard to the matter brought up by my hon. friend from Assiniboia (Mr. Turriff). While I want to join the hon. member in what he said as to the minister's good faith in his effort to improve the conditions of the grain trade and of grain transport under the administration of his department, and while I have every confidence in the good intentions of the minister, at the same time I am bound to say that, as I followed his argument, I was reminded of the argument made a few minutes ago by the hon. member for East Simcoe (Mr. Bennett) when dealing with the grievances of the lake-carriers and the difficulties of weighing at the receiving elevators. The conditions complained of in the letter that my hon. friend from Assini-boia read is exactly parallel to that complained of by the lake carriers, which has been the cause of serious disputes between the elevator people and the grain shippers, and which is to be made the basis of legislation :by the Government

during this session. The difference is that in the cases brought to the attention of the Government by the hon. member for Assiniboia, the complainant or vi'tim is the individual farmer or the small shipper, whereas in the case of the grain carriers, the complainant is a large organization which has capital and means of bringing what grievances it has to the attention of the Government or indeed of forcing them upon the attention of any government. iSome people say that because it is the individual farmer or small grain shipper who suffers a loss because of leakage or shortage between the interior elevator and the terminals, it is a small matter; but I maintain that, for the success of the Government policy in regard to elevators, it is a more important question than that of the dispute between the carriers and the elevators. If the Government has any purpose in operating the elevator at Fort William, it is to encourage the individual farmer to ship his grain direct, and to give the farmer all the profit that it is possible for him to receive out of the production and marketing of his grain. If the farmer who ships from his local siding either through a local elevator or from an elevated platform, is liable to be robbed of his grain in transit without recourse, then he is certainly going to be deterred from shinninst. And the purpose of the terminal elevator at Fort William is not going to be served. It is not possible to prevent leakages, but it is possible to make the railway company absolutely responsible for any leakages that occur; just as the legislation which is not to be passed, but which is now before Parliament, makes the lake carrier absolutely responsible for any leakage that may occur. When the railway company receives so much grain from the loading platform or the elevator they should turn out that amount of grain at the terminal elevator; and if they lose the grain it should be their loss and not that of the farmer. If the grain is loaded from the platform into the cars, the weight taken at that place, if it is possible to take it, should govern as to the outturn at the other end. That is the object to be achieved, and if it cannot be achieved under present legislation then I think legislation should be provided under which it could be achieved.


Mr. WRIGHT:: I would like to ask the hon. gentleman how he would determine 
the weight that goes into the car that is loaded, not at the local elevator but over the platform?


Frank Oliver: I understand that there is no particular difficulty in weighing the grain into the car from the elevator.


William Wright: The hon. gentleman was pointing out the difficulty of determining the loss to the farmer who might ship from the local^levator or from the loading platform. If the farmer ships his wheat through the local elevator, he has his weights taken, and has his records. These absolutely determine wnat he has put through the elevator. But if he ships it over the loading platform, there is no way that I know of to determine the weight. I do not j*.now of any way of determining that weight before it gets to the Government weigher at the terminal elevator. That is one of the difficulties the farmer is up against. Loading over the platform, there is no way by which the farmer can determine the weight unless he takes it to a local scale and has each load weigxit^ separately. He has those weights to guide in determining the weight of the whole load in the car, and that might determine it with some measure of accuracy.
I did not quite understand the minister, and while I am on my feet I would like to ask him with regard to a statement he made that a certain time was given to the farmer free who put his grain through the elevators erected at Saskatoon or Moosejaw. But a great deal of the grain of the West is produced at points east of these elevators, and so many of the producers of grain could not make use of them. Would the same length of time be allowed free to the farmer who ships his grain direct to the terminal elevator at Fort William? .


George Eulas Foster: The charge for elevating into the elevators in the West is made low, and the elevating charge covers-storage for a certain number of days.


William Wright: Does that apply to the
terminal elevator as well as the interior elevators?


George Eulas Foster: For grain that is taken out of the interior elevator and transferred to the elevator at 5 p.m. Fort William the charge is a lower charge, and that carries with it free storage for a certain number of days.
Mr. WRIGHT; The hon. gentleman has not quite answered my question. If the

farmer ships direct to the terminal elevator
at Fort William, what time would he have?
*


George Eulas Foster: Fifteen daysexactly the same as in the other case.


Frank Oliver: In regard to the point
raised by my hon. friend from Muskoka (Mr. Wright), certainly if the farmer cannot have a definite weight or measure on shipment, he cannot expect a definite recourse on outturn. But if he can get such a definite weight on shipment, then I say he should have a definite weight on outturn and if he cannot get weight he certainly can get measure. For, when the car is loaded from the loading platform and levelled off, and a chalk line is drawn all around the car at the level of the grain, if, when the car gets to Fort William it is not up to that measure * -that is, allowing for a certain amount of shrinkage- that is proof that there has been leakage. So, the farmer could have a weight, or he could have a measure, beyond any question. There is an instance mentioned by the writer of this letter, of grain actually weighed by the Government weigher at Winnipeg and weighed again by the Government weigher at Fort William, and the shipper had to stand the loss for leakage on the way.


William Wright: It could not be weighed at Winnipeg. The only way would be to weigh the loads and take what tare may happen to be written on the outside of the car. But the only place where it cau be weighed definitely is at Fort William, or wherever it is unloaded. If the grain were unloaded at Winnipeg, going to a local mill or something of that kind, then the weight at Winnipeg could be accurately ascertained. But the average man shipping his grain to Fort William would have no means of determining the weight of his grain at Winnipeg, outside of taking the cars at their actual tare and deducting that from the gross weight. The weight of the grain is always determined at Fort William; the inspection is done at Winnipeg and Fort William. But there is no way of determining the weight of the grain at Winnipeg.	.


Frank Oliver: I am not shipping the grain, nor am I handling the elevator; I am simply saying that Mr. Campbell mentioned a certain instance. If I remember his letter correctly, he said that a certain amount of grain, having been weighed at Fort William-*


George Eulas Foster: St. Boniface.


Frank Oliver: St. Boniface-showed a loss in transit, and that loss had not been made good by the railway company up to date, though the shipment was made nearly a year ago. He urged that there should be some officer appointed by the Government with arbitrary power to make an order in regard to such shortage and enforce the order. Now, I am not going to argue that the Grain Commission itself should not have that power-that this should not be one part of the responsibilities of the Grain Commission. I think the idea of the writer of the letter was that the Grain Commission, being itself in the grain business, so to speak, was not, in all cases, the proper party to render such a decision.
That may be a very fine point, but I think that for the time being most of us would be very glad to give the Grain Commission authority to inquire into and enforce awards in regard to shortages in transit. Above everything else, let the decision be without appeal. In no department of the administration of the law is there greater denial of justice than there is in the unlimited right of appeal. There is no reason why the decision given in the first place should not stand; it is a decision of the human mind anyway, and the chances are that the human mind which had first knowledge of the transaction is the one best qualified to give final decision. So I say that the minister will be well advised if he takes seriously into consideration the complaint voiced by Mr. Campbell, asking for protection to the small shipper in the matter of grain shortages in transit, and that authority be vested in the Grain Commission or in some other body to inquire into and to enforce decisions in regard to the responsibility for these losses. The loss of 100 bushels may, perhaps, be a small thing in a shipment of 150,000,000 bushels of grain, but to the farmer it may mean the loss of his profit on the whole year's work. It is a small thing in the aggregate, but it is a tremendously big thing to him, and his experience will affect the action of a large number of his neighbours. The matter, therefore, has more importance than that assigned to it by the minister. While I give him every credit for good faith in the desire to administer his department well, he will pardon me, as more directly representing the people who are affected by this condition, for pressing their views upon him perhaps somewhat pointedly.


George Eulas Foster: There is no objection to the matter being pressed, but
pOMMONS
I desire to place another view alongside that which has been put forward by my hon. friend. Your man in the West ships a crate of eggs to Winnipeg. He entrusts that shipment to the railway, gets his bill of lading, and the railway has to deliver the goods at the other end. He has a shipment of poultry or crockeryware coming from the east; to all these shipments is applied the common law that regulates the carrying system of this country. All shipments, whether large or small, must be delivered at their destination by the carrier, and if they are not delivered in good form or not delivered at all, recourse is had by the shipper against the carrier. The farmer who deals in grain or in anytning else is subject to the same law; he entrusts his shipment to the carrier; the carrier undertakes to deliver that shipment at its destination, and if he does not deliver it he has to account to the man who ships. It is always the case that the man who ships a dozen eggs is not in as good a position to press his claim as the man who ships a million dozen; the big trader will always have the advantage in making terms or in enforcing his claims against the carrier. That is the common lot of all of us, in every condition of life.


Mr. W. H. SHARPE:: I think that the conditions affecting the grain trade are just a little different from those which apply to the things that the hon. minister has just mentioned. We have a grain commission to handle the grain trade of Western Canada, and if that grain commission are going to handle part of the grain, I think they should handle all of it. If, as Mr. Campbell states, grain was weighed in St. Boniface and again at Fort William or rort Arthur, and a loss of three or four hundred bushels was disclosed, it seems to me that it is plain that the railway company should make good that loss.


George Eulas Foster: We all agree on that.


William Henry Sharpe: I do not see why all
-these cases should not be put in the hands of the Grain Commission; as a matter of fact, I think I remember instances in which the Grain Commission interfered in cases of tms kind and succeeded in getting the railway companies to make good the losses that had been sustained. I think that the whole of the grain trade, not merely part of it, should be put in the hands of the Grain Commission.


Mr. McKENZIE:: I have listened with
a great deal of interest to the addresses, delivered this afternoon; particularly am I interested in the paternal solicitude which is exercised by the Government and by the minister over the farmers of the West. Great care is taken that everything is done for the western farmer; with the eaestern farmer it is quite different. I should like to know what is the quid pro quo for the miner and the fisherman and the lumberman in New Brunswick,. Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island who pay their fair share of all this money that is being expended in the West? I remember that as far back as 1881 we started to put our money into the West for the development of the land and of railways, and so forth, and we have been continually doing it ever since. And now we are spending our money in paying commissioners and other officials to see that the farmer of the West is protected. T7je story in the East' has always been that we should give for the purpose of developing the West, so that it might become the granary of the world, that foodstuffs would become cheaper by reason of the enormous amount of money we were spending in the West, and that flour, which thirty years ago was dear in the Maritime Provinces, would certainly become cheaper. But after twenty-five or thirty years' experience we find that flour instead of getting cheaper is getting dearer. In fact, I 'do not remember any time when flour was as dear in Eastern Canada as it is to-day. If any miner, in my part of the country who is paying $9 or $9.50 a barrel for flour asks me what has become of all the money that he contributed in the way of duties on flour and woollen goods and almost everything that he and his family uses, I am not in a position to tell him. But we pay commissioners and ministers and others to get this information, and I hope the minister this afternoon will be able to put on Hansard something that I can tell the lumbermen and miners of N'ova Scotia when they ask me what has become of their money and how it is that flour is getting 'dearer in stead of cheaper. I wish the minister and the Government would show some solicitude and following care, if I may so call it, over the grain till it becomes flour, and after it becomes flour till it gets into the store and is sold to the miner and the fisherman who has no middleman at all, but has to depend on his own capacity to make the best bargain possible. It looks to me as if there was

some combination of millers or Hour merchants who are putting up unnecessarily the price of flour. This discussion came up in the House a few weeks ago on a motion of the hon. member for Brantford (Mr. Cockshutt) that there should be some control over these prices. It is a difficult matter of course. But we have a Railway Commission in this country, and the origin and the principle of the formation of that commission was to ha've some control over freight rates. That Commission became necessary aftef twenty or thirty years of experience in this country. Why, then, should there not be some control over the price of flour? There may be a difficulty in doing it, but all the.greater necessity for dealing with it; and I believe the day will come when it will be necessary to have a Commission in this country to deal with the question of the prices of flour and all the other commodities that the people must h ave.


Mr. BLAIN:: May I ask whether there was any complaint about the high price of flour l efore the war? My impression is that the price of flour was not very high in Canada before the war began.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Oh, yes. For the last two years in our part of the country the price of flour has been gradually rising, and for at least nine months or a year before the war there was a very strong cry in our part of the country that t.ie price of flour was inordinately high. Yet we are told here that there is an abundance of wheat in the country, more than we can hope to sell to the people who are very much affected by the war. xind that being the case, I am afraid that this cry of the war is simply made the occasion for millers and others to put up the price. If we have more wheat than we can export, if we have plenty of mills and plenty of wheat, I do not see that the mere fact of war should be an excuse or a reason for inordinatly putting up the prices. What I wanted to submit to the minister was that when the fisherman in Nova Scotia has fish to sell he must look after it himself. He must find a .market for himself, and if any of it is lost in transit he has to find his way through the courts as -best he can. There is no commission or machinery of any kind whatever to help the fisherman in selling his goods, and the same with the lumberman and the miner. They have contributed money in large amounts towarus the development of the West, but they have to look out for
themselves the best way they can. We are all glad that the West is developing, but I am not making a far-fetched argument when I say that the contention in Eastern Canada always was, as the minister knows, that the day would come when the enormous development of the West would give us cheap flour, cheap foodstuffs, and so forth. I say that there should be strong oversight at all events, over the grain from the time it leaves the farmer until it is put in the flour barrel, and after it is put in the flour barrel, until it is sold to the miner or the lumberman or the fisherman, who must buy it at the price it is offered. If the machinery of the minister's department is not sufficient to supervise these matters, the people are willing to pay for any further instruments that he may bring to his aid in keeping these things right. At all events we hope and expect him to be in a position to tell the people of this country that the prices are too high. Even if he does not interfere with any machinery, by way of a commission or otherwise, he should tell the people that the prices are too high, and then it would be time to see whether or not there was a combination and the proper remedy to apply.


Mr. MORPHY:: Do the fishermen of the
province of Nova Scotia use western flour in the pure state, without blending?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Yes, there is no other flour for them to buy.


Mr. MEIGHEN:: I do not propose to follow up by way of answer the sectional appeal made by the hon. member for North Cape Breton (Mr. McKenzie). I do not propose to follow up his complaint that this Government is too solicitous of the good of the western farmer. I am very proud to say they have been solicitous, but I refer his complaint to better hands. I leave it to the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Turriff) and to the hon. member for Edmonton (Mr. Oliver), and I know they will reply to it in much more forceful language than I could use. I am also hopeful that their appeal to him will have more effect than any I could make. Perhaps I could suggest to the hon. member tnat we pay out annual bounties from the treasury to the fishermen, about one-half of whom I think are in the hon. gentleman's own province. We are very glad to pay those bounties, and none of us grudge them in the least, but there is no corresponding bounty in connection wiui any other industry in our country.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Does the hon. gentleman know the origin of those bounties?


Arthur Meighen: I am quite aware that they are paid out of the revenue from an award which was made by a tribunal.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: It is Yankee money.


Arthur Meighen: That award, when it
was made, was the property of the whole Canadian people, and if any had a particular interest in it, it would be the fishermen of earlier days, and not the fishermen of subsequent times. However, that question does not arise, because no one for the purposes of this debate questions the propriety of it at all. What I rose to say was this: The hon. member for Edmonton has offered some observations on the advisability of the Grain Commission having the control and disposition of shortages and overages arising chiefly through carriage by water, and to some extent also through carriage on land.
He has argued that it would be well were the grain commission given power to fix responsibility and assess the proportion in which the shortages should be borne. On the other hand, my hon. friend the Minister of Trade and Commerce argues that that would be departing from the general scheme of fixing responsibilities, and that dealers in western grain have no more right to appeal to another tribunal in respect to grain than they would have in respect to other commodities or than citizens in other parts of Canada would have in respect to articles they shipped. I wish to offer another suggestion to lay alongside of the -two. It is, I must admit, in support in some degree of what has been advanced by the hon. member for Edmonton. The question of a tribunal to which any traffic must be referred is after all simply a question of which tribunal is best. If it were possible, for any other class of damages, or any other class of difficulties, in regard to civil rights, or the regulation of the trade, to establish a tribunal other than the courts which would give better results than the courts, in my opinion the people engaged in that trade would have the right were the class large enough to that tribunal. The whole question amounts to this: is the class of cases of such extent, and do these cases involve such special matters of investigation and difficulty, that a special tribunal can best deal with them? It is well known that very many problems are now referred not to the courts but to commissioners. The province of Ontario now 
presents a most pronounced example in connection with the administration of a very large area of cases-cases in connection with workmen's compensation. They have relieved the courts entirely of the disposition of these cases and committed them without recourse to a workmen's compensation commission. The question as to whether in this case reference to a commission would be the better method I would think, would be this: is that commission in a better position than any court to dispose of questions of shortage and overage and to make regulations in the main governing the disposition of shortage and overage? Is it in a better position to do that? If it is, it appears to me that the question is settled. If it is able better to get at the evidence, if it is composed of men more familiar with the trade, if it is provided with the means of getting the evidence and doing substantial justice, to a greater degree than the courts, then, it appears to me, we have the answer to the problem, and such a tribunal should be clothed with the necessary powers. May I put it again? The question before us is not: are the people entitled to any better remedy than any other? They are entitled to the best they can get. If the Grain Commission is the best tribunal, then we should give them the Grain Commission. It appears to me that it is the best tribunal because it appears to me that in the long run likely more justice can be done than by recourse' to the courts. The main reason is that in this matter of the regulation of the traffic in grain there might in the courts be great delay. Delay is exceptionally dangerous, and delay is inseparably incident to court procedure. It might be better that the usual rules of evidence should be departed from, and perhaps injury done in some cases, than that we should be compelled to resort to the protracted proceedings of the courts.
I offer this only alongside of the views put forward by the hon. member for Edmonton.


Mr. BURNHAM:: It seems to me that
this discussion is founded upon what may be called the fallibility of the human race in regard to its own affairs. The various sufferings which people endure by reason of their incapacity are made up for as nearly as possible by what is known as a system of insurance. It is possible, therefore, where people cannot have recourse to law, or because the facts are such that they cannot be reasonably ascertained, to institute a system of insurance so that there will not really be any injustice done to any-

body, and this system might reasonably be extended to all Canada. Perhaps we could go a little further and extend it to every branch of that trade. We have had the same principle worked out after a great struggle during a long course of years in the Workmen's Compensation Act; let us have it also here. I do not think it is quite fair to say, as the hon. member for Cape Breton North (Mr. McKenzie) has said, that we are spoon-feeding the West all the time and that we get no return. I must confess that I am a little frightened at the present time, considering that the farmers of Ontario, by reason of the decrease in the price of their farms through the competition of the West, have lost not less than $500,000,000 for the benefit of the West. But I wish to emphasize it, and I believe I am right when I say, that this difficulty could be overcome by means of the institution of an insurance policy. It seems to be quite reasonable and proper that the Government should institute it. They might possibly assess the shipper and the producer everywhere a very small amount for that purpose. There is no real reason why the state, which undertakes to control and administer the affairs of the people, should not provide in every particular for the efficient carrying out of the same.
To provide for the construction, acquisition, leasing or expropriation of terminal elevators, revote, $3,000,000.


Charles Marcil: I would like to ask the
minister if he would give the committee any explanation of the increase in the price of flour. The minister has described the care that is taken of the farmer's wheat from the time it leaves the wheat fields until it arrives at Port Arthur. After the grain has reached that point, what action, if any, does the Government take? Does the Government's action cease at Port Arthur and does the minister know why the price of flour has increased during the last few years? What happens after the wheat has reached Port Arthur and is put on board the boat there? Is there any other control exercised over the shipper, the carrier, the miller or the middleman before the flour finally gets to the consumer?


George Eulas Foster: It is somewhat cruel of my hon. friend, when my attention is centered on this great elevator and grain business, to call me back to a problem which we could discuss for a long, long while. I might at least give my hon. friend one reason why flour is higher
to-day than it was two years ago: it is because the price of the grain out of which the flour is manufactured is a good deal higher than it was.
I remember that three years ago good merchantable wheat out of which good flour could be made, could be bought in the West at from 55 cents to 65 cents per bushel, but at present you cannot buy that same wheat for less than from $1.35 to $1.50 per bushel. The fundamental cause of the increase in price is the war and the conditions that have arisen from the war. I think you will find it true if you take all commercial transactions into account, that the moment there is one very predominating cause that makes for a rise in the price of an article, there is a tendency to give that a boost by everybody who has something to do with the handling of that article. I think myself that in the stores of Ottawa, Montreal and Toronto, we are paying to-day higher prices than are warranted by intrinsic conditions, simply because of the rise that has taken place in the staple commodities because of the war, and, in sympathy with that there is a tendency for everything to go a little higher. That is somewhat unphilosophical, but I think it may explain a little bit of the rise. The main reason is due to the fact that the material out of which flour is made has almost doubled in value, and there is beyond this a period when no man knows to what prices may go, and under such circumstances there is a tendency not to reduce prices, but to hold on and keep the prices up. I hope my hon. friend will excuse me for not going further into this.


Charles Marcil: The minister has expressed the view generally held and I am thankful to him. What supervision is exercised after the grain leaves Port Arthur?


George Eulas Foster: There is supervision in the eastern elevators to a certain extent. The grain having received its final certificate at Fort William, it carries this final certificate clear through to the point of shipment. I did say we might have more supervision over the weighing in and out through the eastern elevators along the Georgian bay and down to Montreal and Quebec.


Mr. GERMAN:: Was the $4,700,000 voted last year all used?


George Eulas Foster: No.


William Manley German: This is practically a revote of a portion of that money?
t


George Eulas Foster: Yes.


William Manley German: Is it the intention of
the minister to adopt the policy of taking over the Canadian Pacific railway, the Canadian Northern railway and the Grand Trunk Pacific elevators at Port Arthur and Fort William?


George Eulas Foster: No.


William Manley German: Then, what terminal
elevators are referred to in the vote?


George Eulas Foster: We are taking over none, but there was power given to us in the Grain Act to expropriate, take over, or construct; and, while this vote is entirely for construction, we had to follow the wording of the Act in the vote. Nothing will be taken over so far as we have the least idea at the present time, but there is a transfer elevator to be built at Vancouver for the Pacific coast as a complement to the terminal elevator at Calgary, and there is also a terminal elevator to be built in due time at Hudson bay to act as a transfer for the Saskatoon and Moosejaw elevators, when the route to the Hudson bay is prepared to carry grain.


William Manley German: When will that be?


George Eulas Foster: I could not say to within a week.
Department ot Public Works-civil Government, $569,835.


Robert Rogers: In our civil government we have a clean bill of health; there are no increases except the ordinary statutory increases.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Do I understand that
Mr. Ewart, chief architect, nas been superannuated?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Who succeeds Mr. Ewart?


Robert Rogers: Mr. Horwood.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Has he been appointed by the Civil Service Commission?


Robert Rogers: No.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Why?


Robert Rogers: We asked the Civil Service Commission to make the appointment, and in their judgment they did not think it was wise to do so. They gave it some consideration, I believe, but they did not approve of the appointment. We have to have a chief architect, and Mr. Horwood was the man who, in the judgment of the

department,, was the best available to take the position.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Am I to understand that Mr. Horwood has been taken on without the approval of the Civil Service Commission?


Robert Rogers: That is right.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Is he not a technical officer? .


Robert Rogers: The office of chief architect is really not a technical position; it is a position of great importance, and one that is entitled to consideration beyond the scope of the Civil Service Commission.


William Manley German: I had it in my mind that Mr. Ewart was to be retained as a consulting architect.


Robert Rogers: He is.


William Manley German: That is right; he is an excellent man.


Edmond Proulx: Does Mr. Horwood come from Winnipeg?


Robert Rogers: No, he comes from
Ottawa.


Edmond Proulx: Is he the gentleman who designed the plans for the new Parliament buildings in Manitoba?


Robert Rogers: No.


Edmond Proulx: Is there not a Mr. Horwood in Winnipeg?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Edmond Proulx: Another gentleman?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


John Gillanders Turriff: What relation is Mr. Horwood of Ottawa to the architect in Winnipeg of the same name who. in connection with the foundation for the parliament buildings there, cancelled the written contract for $64,000 and afterwards put in other foundations that cost $778,000?


Robert Rogers: I am responsible for
the figures which my hon. friend has quoted in regard to the buildings at Winnipeg, and I do not know anything about them. I have never seen any figures to show that the state of affairs is such as my hon. friend suggests. Mr. Horwood here is, I believe, a .brother of Mr. Horwood in the city o,f Winnipeg. He is an architect of long standing in the city of Ottawa, and is well known here as an excellent architect.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Is there any correspondence 'between the department and the Civil Service Commission as to the appointment of Mr. Horwood?


Robert Rogers: Yes, I believe there is.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Will my hon. friend be kind enough to 'bring it down later on?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Edmond Proulx: What was the salary of Mr. Ewart, as chief architect?


Robert Rogers: 


Edmond Proulx: $3,000 is a large increase in these hard times.


Robert Rogers: It is impossible to get a man capable to fill the post of chief architect in the department at the present time unless such a salary is given. This salary was voted last year by this House for this purpose.


Edmond Proulx: What is the salary of the chief engineer of the Public Works Department?


Robert Rogers: It has been $4,000 up to date, but it should be increased; and il I can possibly do so, I hope to ask the House to increase it before we get through.


Edmond Proulx: The salary of the deputy minister is only $5,000, and he has more responsibility than the chief architect has.
Mr. MARC1L: What is the policy followed by the minister in regard to promotions in the inside service? Every time a member comes to Ottawa, 'he meets a large number of officials who complain that although they have been many years in the service, new men are brought in and promotions given right and left, and that they are overlooked unless they are recommended by some one in particular. When a man has reached the maximum of his class, what happens to him? Does he remain there for life, or is there any hope of promotion for him? What has to be done to get him into a higher class?


Robert Rogers: A man employed in the department makes application [DOT]himself to the head of his particular branch, and that head reports the matter to the minister. His application is considered, and if approved it is transferred to the Civil Service Commission for consideration. If the Civil Service Commission approves, the promotion takes place.


Charles Marcil: There must be a vacancy in another branch, before he can be promoted to that branch?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Edmond Proulx: Did the minister ask for applications for the position of chief architect, or did he ask only this particular man to fill the position?	[DOT]


Robert Rogers: We had been looking for some months to get a man to take this position, before we decided upon Mr. Horwood.


Edmond Proulx: Did the Civil Service Commission advertise for a chief architect?


Robert Rogers: No.


Edmond Proulx: Why was not the appointment made through the Civil Service Commission? I understand that all the appointments in the different departments are filled through the Civil Service Commission; that is, a department asks the Civil Service Commission to recommend a man, and the commission advertises in the Canada Gazette and posts up advertisements in the different post offices throughout tne country. The minister does not know whether or not he could have got a man for less than $7,000. If Mr. Ewart's salary was $4,000, there is an increase of $3,000, although the cost of living has not increased in that proportion. I find fault that in the different-departments the ministers are too prone to pay very large salaries to the chief officials and to let the poor messengers starve on $500 a year. A messenger came to me the other day and said that he had been in the hospital. He had to go into the public ward; and when, the bill was sent to the city, the city would not pay it, the city treasurer claiming that the Government should pay their men sufficient salaries to enable them to pay their hospital bills. This man said that his wife had been sick, and that he could not afford to call in a doctor. Rents are very high and the cost of living has increased. The minister goes on increasing the salaries of the higher officials from $5,000 to $6,000 or $7,000; in fact, the salary of the Deputy Minister of Justice was increased to $10,000; yet poor messengers who have families to support receive only $500 per year.


Robert Rogers: It is one of the weaknesses of the Civil Service Act that the minimum

salary to start with is $500 a year. We cannot pay more.


Edmond Proulx: The minister should be solicitous for those poor people, and not too solicitous for those who have high salaries.


Robert Rogers: I quite agree with my hon. friend.


Edmond Proulx: The minister might have been able to get a good architect for the salary that Mr. Ewart was receiving/or at least for $6,000 a year. It is an important position, and the minister should have asked for applications and not have selected only one particular man, because he happened to have connections in Winnipeg and to be a friend of my hon. friend.


Frank Oliver: I suppose I will not be accused of being disposed with undue favour towards the members of the ministry or towards the Minister of Public Works; but it strikes me as hardly seemly that an officer of the 'department should be on the same basis as regards salary as the minister who is in charge of the department and whose responsibility must necessarily be very much greater. Either the minister should have more or the employee should have less. In the present time of stringency, it would appear that the alternative would be that in no case should an officer be at as high a salary as the minister. If a special technical employee must receive a high salary, surely the man who is responsible for the discharge by that official of his duty should in common sense receive proportionately more or at least enough to make a distinction between the two positions.


Robert Rogers: I quite agree with my hon. friend. Of course, the salaries of the ministers should be much higher than they are. At the same time, my hon. friend will understand it is impossible to get a chief architect or a chief engineer to-day who is not already in the department at any salary below the amount named. There is no respectable architect in business in any part of Canada that does not earn more than $7,000 in his own office. It would be impossible to get any architect suitable for the important position of chief architect of the Department of Public Works at any less salary than $7,000.


Mr. PUGSLEY:: It seems to me there is great objection from another standpoint- that the minister has gone outside of his department to select a chief architect. For

the proper encouragement of the men in the different departments, the principle of promotion should be acted upon. In the department, I know-I do not think I can possibly be mistaken-there are men, or were when I was minister, who are thoroughly qualified to take the position of chief architect. I have not a shadow of doubt about that. I think it is very objectionable to go outside and bring in a man and place him over the heads of those who have been for a long time in the department, and give him a greatly increased salary. This Government seems to be trying to break the Civil Service Act all to pieces, and I do not know of any more glaring case than the present. Take the chief engineer: he is well qualified to discharge his duty, and yet he receives a salary of only $4,000. That, I think, was fixed by the Civil Service Act by unanimous consent of this House. His duties are more onerous than those of the chief architect. They certainly require as great ability and qs good judgment for their proper discharge. The chief engineer has been for a long time in the department, and, as I have said, he receives a salary of $4,000, in accordance with the terms of the Civil Service Act. Yet a new man is brought in and placed over the heads of all others, at a salary nearly double that which the chief engineer receives. It does seem to me that my hon. friend is making a great mistake in doing this. He is taking a step calculated to create discontent in the department, and is violating in the strongest way, not only the terms but the spirit of the Civil Service Act.


Robert Rogers: I agree with a great deal of what my hon. friend has said; but we had to deal with the case on practical considerations. The occasion for the appointment of the new chief architect was that Mr. Ewart asked to be relieved of the heavy responsibilities. The only other man that I know of who was in the department and who could have taken the place of Mr. Ewart as chief architect, was Mr. Wright. But Mr. Wright conceived the idea that he could do a much better business for himself outside the department, and resigned a short time before Mr. Ewart did. Had Mr. Wright still been in the department, he would undoubtedly have got the position of chief architect, because he is a really good man. But, after Mr. Wright, there was no one in the department who aspired to the position of chief.


William Pugsley: What was Mr. Wrights salary when he resigned?


Robert Rogers: It was $3,800. He was a very good man; he had the material in him for a chief architect had he not resigned. It was necessary in the public interest to engage a good chief architect, and it is impossible-or was at that time- to secure one who would fill the position at less salary. This salary was approved by the House and voted last year.


William Pugsley: The sailary of $7,000 was not. voted?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


William Pugsley: Why is the vote of $3,000 in the Supplementary Estimates this year?


Robert Rogers: Because the chief architect was not appointed until six months ago. We had to put his name in the Estimates by reason of the fact that he has not passed the Civil Service Commission.


William Pugsley: It being in violation of the Civil Service Act, he has to be named?


Mr. KYTE:: When the minister next has his Estimates before the committee he will be expected to give information with respect to the work that Mr. Gobeil, late Deputy Minister of Public Works, has been engaged in for the department.
At six o'clock, the House resumed, and then took recess.
The House resumed at eight o'clock.



[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 107, respecting a patent of John Millen & Son, Limited.-Mr. Webster.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 117, for the relief of Edith Mar-guerita Lyons.-Mr. Barnard.

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Sevigny in the Chair.
Department of Public Works-contingencies, $85,000.	-
['No.\nProgress reported.']
Edmond Proulx: The Minister of Public
Works has stated that if Mr. Wright, assistant to Mr. Ewart, had not resigned, he would have promoted him. Did the minister give Mr. Wright to understand that he vrould be promoted upon Mr. Ewart's retirement? I believe that Mr. Wright resigned because he knew that he was not going to get the promotion.


Robert Rogers: I am quite satisfied that Mr. Wright did not resign because he knew that he was not going to get the promotion. If my memory serves me rightly, I discussed the matter with Mr. Wright. He had in view what appeared to foe very bright prospects when he resigned to take up the position which he eventually did take up, and while the . business has not succeeded as he expected it would, I understand that he is doing very well. I should be very glad to have Mr. Wright back in the department in any position that I could get him to fill.


Edmond Proulx: Did the minister hold
before him the bright prospect of promotion?


Robert Rogers: Certainly I did.


Edmond Proulx: Was that before Mr. Ewart resigned?


Robert Rogers: No, after.


Edmond Proulx: How long was the position vacant?


Robert Rogers: It really was not vacant at all. Mr. Ewart expressed a desire to be relieved of his duties, but foe did the work until it was possible for us to find some one to take his place.


Edmond Proulx: Was Mr. Wright offered
the position then?


Robert Rogers: I cannot recall that definitely; I know that the matter was discussed with him.


Mr. KNOWLES:: Did he ask for it?


Robert Rogers: No.


William Erskine Knowles: Did he say he would take
it if he got it?


Robert Rogers: I do not remember that; I think he was really anxious to take up this new work. Mr. Wright is a good man, and we would have been glad to have him in the department.


Edmond Proulx: I do not suppose Mr. Wright expected to get $7,000, even if he did get the position.


Robert Rogers: Well, he was worth it.
Public Works-Ottawa Archives building, extension, $50,000.


Edmond Proulx: Will this extension be built this year?


Robert Rogers: My hon. friend knows that we are not going on with any buildings



which it is possible to do without. Whether this particular building is a necessity this year or not, I am not in a position to say; if it proves to be a necessity, we will go on with it.	*


George William Kyte: On March 5, I asked the following questions of the Minister of Public Works:
1.	When did A. Gobeil retire from the posi-stion of Deputy Minister of Public Works?
2.	How long was he in that office?
3.	What was the amount of his retiring allowance under the statute?
4.	Is he employed by any department of the Government at the present time, and what is the nature of such employment?
5.	What is the total amount he receives from the Government at the present time?
The following answers weie given:
1.	1st July, 1908.
2.	Appointed deputy minister on 1st January, 1891.
3.	$2,160.
4.	No.
5.	$2,160.
I felt that there was something which the Minister of Public Works had not given out in his reply to these questions, so subsequently I addressed the following questions to him:
1.	Was A. Gobeil, former Deputy Minister of Public Works, employed by any department of the Government since October 10, 1911?
2.	If so, what was the nature of such employment?
3.	What was the salary or remuneration paid him in respect of such employment?
4.	When did such employment cease?
And this is the answer I got:
1.	Yes, from 15th June, 1912.
2.	To prepare a complete history of the port of Quebec, in relation to the St. Lawrence trade; to investigate titles of ownership of lands required in connection with St. Charles river improvements, and compile other information required by the department.
3.	The difference between his superannuation allowance, $2,160, and $5,000, the salary of a deputy minister.
4.	January 31, 1915.
These replies reveal a most extraordinary condition of affairs. Mr. Gobeil retired in 1908, after having discharged the duties of deputy minister since 1891. On the 15th of June his salary was restored to $5,000, the salary pertaining to the office of Deputy Minister. When I addressed the question to the Minister of Public Works on the 5th day of March, it anticiliated by a few days the. date upon which Mr. Gobeil's salary cheque for the month of February would have gone out; for I understand it is the rule in the depart-

ments-I am familiar at all events with the Department of Railways and Canals-that the salary cheques go out on the 10th of each month. When I asked the question of the minister on the 5th of March, the February cheque had not gone out, and would not have gone out for a few days in the ordinary course of events. Then Mr. Gobeil's employment with the Government suddenly terminated. The employment given to him was of an extremely indefinite character. According to the information given by the Minister of Public Works it would appear that on the 15th of June or some time previous Mr. Gobeil came to the department and saw the then Acting Minister of Public Works, and that as a result of their interview it was decided that Mr. Gobeil's salary would be restored to $5,000. Mr. Gobeil's services commenced on the 15th of June, 1912. Between that date and January 31, 1915, he has drawn, in addition to his superannuation allowance of $2,160, no less a sum than $7,457. I should like the Minister of Public Works to be good enough to say whether or not the work entrusted to Mr. Gobeil, as indicated by his reply to my question, is complete. .


Robert Rogers: In answer to my hon
friend, I would say that what he states is correct. In view of the fact that Mr. Gobeil had such a general knowledge of the public works of this country, and in view of the necessity for an examination in connection with the contemplated work at the harbour of Quebec and in the St. Lawrence river, it was evidently thought by my predecessor in office . that Mr. Gobeil would be a suitable person to make a report on the situation. He was therefore employed and he carried on the work with a great deal ot vigour. On the 31st of January last we felt that the services he had rendered were such as to complete the work he had in hand, and he was therefore relieved of any further duties in connection with reporting on the matter of the development of the harbour at Quebec and St. Lawrence river. These are the facts as closely as I can carry them in my mind. It is true that Mr. Gobeil was employed for the time mentioned by my hon. friend, but, as I said, he is no longer an employee of the department.


George William Kyte: Has the minister a copy of this opus magnum to which Mr. Gobeil

has been devoting his time since the 15th of June, 1912?


Robert Rogers: I have noit a copy here. I shall be glad to find out whether there is a copy in the department and let my hon. friend see it if he wishes.


George William Kyte: Has the book been published yet?


Robert Rogers: Not yet. It is a report, not a book.


George William Kyte: It says that he was employed to prepare a complete history of the port of Quebec. Has the copy reached the hands of the publishers yet?


Robert Rogers: Not that I am aware of.


George William Kyte: Who is to pay for publishing this work ?


Robert Rogers: I do not know that it will be published at all. It will be simply a history of the port of Quebec, for the information of the department.


George William Kyte: Has the department the
history yet?


Robert Rogers: Not that I am aware of.


George William Kyte: Then the department has nothing yet for this $7,457?


Robert Rogers: We have the benefit of all the information that Mr. Gobeil has in connection with that work. I understand the report is being prepared.


George William Kyte: The minister has not the benefit of all the knowledge Mr. Gobeil has, because he has not received the report yet. When does the minister expect to receive it?	*


Robert Rogers: Very shortly.


George William Kyte: Is this course being pursued with regard to the Harbour Commissioners in other parts of Canada?


Robert Rogers: Mr. Gobeil had nothing
at all to do with the Harbour Commissioners in the city of Quebec


George William Kyte: Has the Government undertaken the preparation of a history of any of the other harbours of Canada?


Robert Rogers: Not that I am aware of.


George William Kyte: So this special employment
that was given to Mr. Gobeil was without a precedent?


Robert Rogers: The work was given to
him by my predecessor because he was 124}
specially qualified for it. Mr. Gobeil had a very good knowledge of all such undertakings, and was well qualified to prepare such a report, and to give undoubtedly valuable information to the department and the country in respect to the great port of the city of Quebec.


George William Kyte: Is it intended that this work shall be distributed throughout Canada, or is it just for the benefit of the department?'


Robert Rogers: Wherever there is a necessity for it.


George William Kyte: What were the terms upon
which Mr. Gobeil was employed?


Robert Rogers: All the information the
department has is in the answer given to my hon. friend's question.


George William Kyte: Well, the department has
not very much information. It is rather an extraordinary coincidence that when Mr. Gobeil was employed to do this work there was no remuneration fixed except that he was to enjoy a salary, in addition to his superannuation allowance, which would bring his income up to the sum of $5,000. It is perfectly clear from the statement made by the minister that there was no agreement or contract under which any special work was to be done, but that Mr. Gobeil was for all time, so far as the present Government is concerned, to get around the Superannuation Act and enjoy the salary of $5,000 just as if he were a deputy minister. The minister says that on January 31, Mr. Gobeil's work having been completed, his services were discontinued. Now the minister does not know whether his work has been completed or not, because he has not a copy of the manuscript that Mr. Gobeil prepared, if he prepared anything at all. I should think that if Mr. Gobeil had any legitimate or proper employment it should not cease until his work was in the hands of the minister, and the minister would be able to pass upon the question whether that work fairly represented the amount of money that, was paid. I am bound to s^ay that the sum of $7,457 is a pretty tidy sum to be paid to Mr. Gobeil in addition to his superannuation allowance for the preparation of a history of the port of Quebec. If the question had not been put upon the Order Paper I venture to say that Air. Gobeil would still be enjoying the emoluments pertaining to the employment given to him by the late Minister of Pub-lie Works. The fact that this employ-

ment was given to him by the late minister does not exonerate the present minister from some responsibility. I say that under the circumstances there is no justification for this expenditure of money. The minister admits himself that he knows nothing about the work or the manner in which it was carried on, and he does not know at the present moment whether the work has been completed. I stated before that it was only after my question had been placed on the order paper that Mr. Gobeil's employment terminated. If I had not put the question when I did the presumption is that Mr. Gobeil would have continued to enjoy the emoluments pertaining to the particular employment in which he was engaged.
It is a significant fact that no special compensation was allowed to Mr. Gobeil, but he was to get such a sum as would make up the difference between his superannuation, allowance of $2,160 and $5,000. This is only another way of getting around the Superannuation Act by which a friend of the Government was able to draw from the treasury of this country the sum of $7,457 for services of the value of which to the Department of Public Works there is no evidence.


Mr. PARDEE:: What was really the object of this gentleman going down there and writing the history of the port of Quebec? Is the information not really contained in other histories? How has the Government or the country been able to benefit from a history of the port of Quebec? Was it to help to promote any trade interest or development? Along what line was it necessary that this man should be sent down to do such a thing as that? Was it absolutely necessary to write a history of the port of Quebec to promote ally material interest in connection with that port?


Rodolphe Lemieux: Is the report published?


Robert Rogers: No; we have not received it yet. I might say in answer to my hon. friend from West Lambton (Mr. Pardee) that the port of Quebec is an especially important port and one that requires a great deal of consideration at the hands of the Government. My predecessor, Mr. Monk, was very wise indeed in employing the services of one so capable to deal with the work of research which Mr. Gobeil undertook to do in connection with the port of Quebec. It was contemplated at that time, as is evidenced from the amount of money that has been spent during the past three years, that great development should take

place in that particular port. It was undoubtedly advisable in the public interest that we should have all the information for our use which it was possible to obtain and which we have had both by personal correspondence and conversation with Mr. Gobeil from that time on. Now that he has succeeded in gathering all the information at that port, he is no longer in the employ of the department and his report is expected daily. When it comes I am sure that the report will be of great value and great interest not only to the people of Quebec but to the people in different parts of Canada generally who take an interest in the development of our national ports. There are few, if any, ports that are more important than the port of Quebec, especially in view of the fact that we are about to establish a large dry dock in that port, that large docks are to be constructed and that the harbour commissioners are about to expend large sums of money in the erection of an elevator and other important works. In view of these things it was in the public interest that my predecessor should get the best information and with that object in view he evidently employed Mr. Gobeil.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: I do not understand just what the minister means by his statement in answer to my question. The port of Quebec is to be an important port, a dry dock is to be established, elevators are to be built, many other things are to be done, but the mill does not grind with the water that has gone through. To me, an ordinary onlooker, it would certainly seem unnecessary that Mr. Gobeil should go to Quebec and report on what the port of Quebec was one hundred years ago. It would not help to build elevators or dry docks or show what ought to be done in the future. I quite sympathize with the minister in doing the best he can for his predecessor, but I believe that if he looks this matter squarely in the face, as he and I, ordinary business men, would, he will agree with me when I say that we would not waste more than a couple of hours in reading aboht what the port of Quebec was a hundred years ago, for the purpose of helping us to do something in connection with that port to-day. I am still at a loss to understand why Mr. Monk should have sent Mr. Gobeil down to make a report on the history of Quebec. Take the very important and flourishing port of Sarnia; we might have a history of that port written for the last hundred years, and possibly if we were real good, and wrote and published

the history of Sarnia, we might have elevators, a drydoek and other things there.
I doubt very much if the minister would accede to a request to send a man to write - a history of the port of Sarnia. In all seriousness, I quite appreciate what the minister has said, but again I ask, wherein do the people of Canada benefit by the fact that he has got an unpublished history of Quebec for the past seventy or eighty years.


Robert Rogers: My hon. friend uses the word "history" of Quebec. That may be the term that was used in some of the correspondence, and he may be correct from that point of view, but, as I understand Mr. Gobeil's appointment, it was in connection with the practical work about to be undertaken in that port. The unhappy phrase "history" of Quebec might have been used, but it was not intended that he should write a history of Quebec in the ordinary sense of that word.


Edmond Proulx: Has not the harbour commission of the port of Quebec an engineer to look after its work?


Robert Rogers: Mr. Gobeil ~was appointed before the harbour commissioners were appointed.


Edmond Proulx: Is there an engineer in the employ of the harbour commission?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Is it a fact that Sir William Price, chairman of the harbour commission, has resigned?


Robert Rogers: We were so informed to-day.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Has the resignation of Sir William Price been accepted by the ministers?	'


Robert Rogers: It has not been accepted yet.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I would like to ask the minister if Mr. Gobeil has not been employed also in making valuations of land on the St. Charles river in connection with the locks to be constructed at the mouth of that river? Is there a report in the hands of the hon. gentleman as regards the cost of the locks, and also the cost of the expropriation in connection with the riparian rights?


Robert Rogers: My hon. friend is quite right, and I overlooked the point in referring to the matter that Mr. Gobeil had made reports to the department in connection with the proposed works now under
way on the St. Charles. We have these reports, and I will be glad to bring them down to the House.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What is the approximate cost of the proposed expropriations on the St. Charles river, as reported on by Mr. Gobeil?


Robert Rogers: As far as my memory serves me, the value placed by Mr. Gobeil upon the land to be expropriated is something like $600,000. The price at which the land was valued was 23 cents a foot, and the value of another portion was fixed at a higher figure than that. The smaller portion, which was at the higher price, we refused to accept, but last year the owners came down to the price of 23 cents for the piece at the higher valuation,' and we accepted it.
As I understand it, the owners are now prepared to accept the twenty-three cents, but as the result of a further valuation we think our previous offer was too high, and it will likely go to the Exchequer Court.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I wish the minister would submit to us at the next sitting of the House, a copy of Mr. Gobeil's report on the expropriation of those riparian lands on the river St. Charles, and also a copy of the plan showing where the expropriations will take place.


Robert Rogers: We have such a plan and report and I shall bring it down.


William Erskine Knowles: Will Mr. Gobeil receive any remuneration for the work to which my hon. friend has referred?


Robert Rogers: No, that was part of the work to be done for his salary.
Mr. IiYTE: Has the minister correspondence with Mr. Gobeil, defining the work he is to do for this salary and giving the terms of his engagement?


Robert Rogers: My deputy informs me that there is simply a letter written in 1912 from the chief engineer to Mr. Gobeil.


George William Kyte: Will the minister bring that down?


Robert Rogers: I shall be glad to do so.


George William Kyte: How does the minister explain that Mr. Gobeil's remuneration was fixed at the difference between $2,140 and $5,000? Is that the usual terms upon which legal or other services are engaged by the department?


Robert Rogers: The remuneration was fixed at the sum which the then minister

thought fair and reasonable. The Superannuation Act provides for a man being brought back at the same salary he had previously received, and probably that was in the mind of the minister when he fixed the sum at $5,000.


George William Kyte: Is there anything in the correspondence to indicate when Mr. Gobeil's work was to be finished, or was it to be a continuous engagement during the life of Mr. Gobeil?


Robert Rogers: I have not read the correspondence, but I will bring it down and the hon. member can read it. Mr. Gobeil is not in the service of the Government at the present time.


George William Kyte: I understand that, but it
might be well for the minister himself to read the corresponderfce.


The CHAIRMAN:: Personally I have no objection to this discussion continuing, but it is out of order as not pertaining to the item under discussion.


George William Kyte: I understood that all expenditures in the Public Works Department might be discussed now.


Albert Sévigny: If it is the desire of the committee, I have no objection, but the rule is that the discussion must be strictly relevant to the item before the House.


Robert Rogers: It is quite all right; I
shall be very glad to give any information to hon. gentlemen opposite.


Rodolphe Lemieux: My hon. friend has
stated that Sir William Price has resigned what are the reasons given by Sir William Price for his resignation.


Robert Rogers: Sir William Price is in
no way connected with the Public Works Department; his duties are under the Department of Marine, and I am sure the minister will be pleased to give the information.


Mr. HAZEN:: The only reason why Sir
William Price handed in his resignation is, that he being a man with large interests finds it difficult to give to the discharge of the duties of his office the time and attention required. The relations of the Department of Marine and Fisheries with Sir William Price and the Harbour Commissioners of Quebec have been of the most agreeable and pleasant character.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I may say that I regret, as the minister regrets, and as everybody does, the resignation of Sir William Price.


Edmond Proulx: It took Mr. Gobeil a long time to write his report on the Quebec harbour; was his time exclusively given to the work?


Robert Rogers: I am informed that he
had no other employment and that he devoted all his time to the work.


Edmond Proulx: Mr. Gobeil is an advocate, practising his profession, and it may be that he did not give his whole time to the work of the department. I do not hold the present minister responsible, because he says his predecessor requested him to employ Mr. Gobeil, but although my hon. friend has tried to cover the matter as cleverly as possible, I believe that Mr. Gobeil, having been the Conservative candidate in Montmorency in 1908, this job was given to him as a reward, and the people of the country have to pay for it.


George William Kyte: Has the minister any communication from Mr. Gobeil stating that the work is completed?


Robert Rogers: Mr. Gobeil has been
sending in reports in connection with the different works at the port of Quebec, such as the special work we are doing in connection with the development of the St. Charles river, which is a very large, a very necessary, and a very important work. These reports will be brought down to the House.


William Erskine Knowles: I suppose the minister will get these reports printed and send each member of the House a complimentary copy?


Robert Rogers: I shall be delighted to
do so.


William Erskine Knowles: What was the salary
paid Mr. Ewart, the former chief architect?


Robert Rogers: $4,000.


William Erskine Knowles: When was the salary
raised to $7,000 per annum?


Robert Rogers: When Mr. Ewart decided he desired to be relieved from the responsible duties of chief architect, *which were growing from year to year, and a new architect had to be secured.


William Erskine Knowles: How' long has the new architect been appointed?


Robert Rogers: About six months.


William Erskine Knowles: If we voted only $4,000 for the salary last year, how has he been paid $7,000? Has Mr. Horwood been paid?


Robert Rogers: He cannot be paid until this vote is passed.


William Erskine Knowles: Why cannot he be
paid like any otner person who is appointed to office?


Robert Rogers: Because his name has
to be put in the Estimates.


William Erskine Knowles: Why?
' Mr. ROGERS:	Because he has not a
certificate from the Civil Service Commission.


William Erskine Knowles: Has the minister asked tne Civil Service Commissioners or either of them to o.k. Mr. Horwood?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


William Erskine Knowles: What did they say?


Robert Rogers: They refused to do it.


William Erskine Knowles: Was there much correspondence about it?


Robert Rogers: Some.


William Erskine Knowles: Was it not on account of that that the minister expressed such virtuous indignation against Mr. Shortt?


Robert Rogers: I can assure my hon.
friend it was not; I never thought of it.


William Erskine Knowles: Will the minister tell me why he was so angry?


Robert Rogers: I told the House before, while the hon. member was absent.


William Erskine Knowles: I read the report in Hansard very carefully, and I could not see any reasonable explanation for such indignation.


Robert Rogers: The matter was discussed quite shortly.


William Erskine Knowles: You are a little short on explanation.	4


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: There is no doubt that the development of the port of Quebec is important, and that the harbour of Quebec historically is well known in Canada as being one of the most magnificent poTts in this great country of ours. The peculiarity about this report is that to the ordinary man it is a question of engineering, such a report as the minister would get from an engineer. There is some dredging to be done, and it is a question of measurements, of estimating how much earth is to be re- moved and what concrete and supports will be necessary for the piers that are to be constructed at the port. We have a very excellent development of that kind going on in the harbour of Halifax and in the harbour of St. John, but I am not aware that any lawyer has to be engaged to write a history of the harbour of Halifax or of the harbour of St John. I want to bring this matter to the notice of the ministers generally that, while we have very excellent men in the different departments-and I would be sorry to think that we have not good officials capable of discharging the various duties devolving upon them and of furnishing any information that the different departments require-whenever any thing special is to be done under this Administration an outsider must be obtained. In some inquiries that are going on not one thousand miles from this place, it has developed that when anything has to be bought, or anything to be done or any information to be secured, an outsider has always to be secured, and that there is no one in the departments capable of doing the work. That is a sad state of affairs, if it is true.
I do not believe it is true; I believe we have capable officials, and I must bring the blame home to the minister and his brother ministers that this policy is adopted only for the purpose of giving employment to their friends outside. The officials of the different departments are there for the purpose of doing the work pertaining to those departments; but the ministers, in order to widen their sphere of employment, when it is a question of buying binoculars or truck 'wagons, must employ men of large salary and high education, in the legal profession particularly, to do that kind of work. I would be sorry to say a word that would reflect anything but the highest credit upon Mr. Gobeil. I knew him well; he was in the Department of Public Works when I came here first, and a better officer I never came across. He is a good lawyer, and I could understand his being employed by the Minister of Public Works to secure a law library for his department or to write a treatise on titles for land in the province of Quebec-


Rodolphe Lemieux: Or the McGreevy case.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Perhaps it was because he knew too much about the McGreevy case that he was employed; but

to employ a lawyer like himself to make an engineering report is something that I do not quite understand.


Robert Rogers: Although I think my hon. friend has answered himself, I may say that in so far as Mr. -Gobeil's -standing as a lawyer is concerned, he has never practised his profession at all. He was in the Department of Public Works for over thirty years; he was for ten or twelve years secretary of the department, and he was for seventeen years Deputy Minister of Public Works. Therefore, M-r. Gobeil was the man in Canada who would be most likely to have a proper knowledge where special work was required -and who would be capable of making a report or of giving information -to the department that would be valuable and sound, in view of his long and thorough understanding of the conditions and of the manner in which the department carried on its business. As I understand it, he has made very valuable reports in connection with the different works at Quebec; and, while I have not time to Tead them, I will -see that they are all brought down and laid on the table of the House, so that hon. gentlemen who are interested will have an opportunity of reading them.
Ottawa Parliament Buildings - additions, $100,000.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: What is that?


Robert Rogers: That -is an addition to this building. This vote is t'he same one as we had last year, but we did not go on with the work.
Mr. Mc-CRANEY: Are those votes included in the sum of $50,000,000 for' special expenditure other than the war, mentioned in the Budget speech of the Minister o-f Fin- * ance?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


George Ewan McCraney: The minister has not thought it desirable to drop some of the items for the present year so that the amount necessary to be realised may be reduced?


Robert Rogers: When the Estimates
were prepared this year, we dropped a number of items as they were printed last year. We have included in the Estimates only such items as we are hopeful, if the war should cease and conditions improve, we shall >be able to go on with.


Edmond Proulx: I find in the Auditor
General's Report that a quantity of furni-

ture has been purchased by the Department of Public Works for the different offices in the public buildings. Since the Government came into power, what have they done with the furniture that was there when they -came in? $900 was spent to furnish the office of the Minister of Justice, and about $800 to furnish -the office of the Secretary of State. There must have been some furniture there when the present Government came in.


Mr. HENDERSON:: Goodness knows; perhaps it was -all gone.


Edmond Proulx: What was d-one with it? Was it thrown out or was it given to my hon. friend's friends?


Robert Rogers: No.


Mr. PROLTLX:: The Department of Public Works bought a rug for the Secretary .of State's office valued at $350.


Robert Rogers: It must be a mistake.


David Henderson: How bi-g was it?


Edmond Proulx: I do not know. I would like to see that rug. There was purchased from Murray-Kay, Limited, three rugs, one at $385. I said $350; I undervalued it. There is a rug at $85, and another at $49.50. I would like to know the size of that rug valued at $385?


George William Kyte: Was it made in Canada?


Edmond Proulx: I do not know whether there is as expensive a rug in Windsor Palace. In the Justice Department there is an item for furniture for the minister's room, $805.


David Henderson: No justice about that.


Edmond Proulx: There is a bookcase, $54; three -chairs, $78.50; clock, $10; davenport, $63; -covering davenport with leather, $35; desk, $135. You can buy a good desk for $50-in fact, for $25. I bought one the other day from the Office Specialty Company, for the office of the school inspector of my county, and I paid only $25.


Robert Rogers: Was it delivered for that?


Edmond Proulx: The freight from their establishment in Newmarket cost only about a dollar. But this $135 is not all. There is a glass desk-top, $32.85. And the furniture for the minister's room cost $805-two leather chairs, $16.50; three mahogany dinners, $38.85. Does the minister give dinners in his office? For a waste-paper basket we paid $9-you can get one any-

where for half a dollar. When the Liberals were in power we heard about the middleman. But turn to the Auditor General's Report and you will see that under this Government articles to furnish the departments are not bought directly from the manufacturers but from the middlemen. The Government could save 25 per cent or 30 per cent if they dealt with the wholesale men or manufacturers. If it were not that I dislike to take up the time of the committee, I could go through the record of these departments and show that thousands and thousands of dollars have been spent on furniture since this Government come into office. Surely the old furniture was all right. When the hon. member for St. John City (Mr. Pugsley) was Minister of Public Works, if a colleague of his had had come and asked him to pay $385 for a rug, I think he would have thought that colleague was out of his mind. We see now the greatest extravagance that has ever reigned under any Government in this country. Fortunately the Government will have to render an account to the people very soon, and I shall be very much surprised if the voters do not hold them to a very strict account. I can well understand why my hon. friend from Guysborough (Mr. {Sinclair), when he spoke on the Budget said this Government is spending the money of the people like a lot of drunken sailors. I have been struck with the truth of that expression since I commenced to look into the. Auditor General's Report. On reading these figures I was astounded and disgusted at the extravagance they reveal.


Robert Rogers: I am sorry that my hon. friend has been so shocked, astounded and pained. I do not know that a fair examination of the accounts will show that the furniture for the Department of Justice or the Department of -the Secretary of State was too expensive. The furniture from those offices, no doubt, was used in otheT offices in the different buildings. That is always the practice; furniture that is old and worn to some extent in the offices of the ministers is removed, and is cleaned up and placed in some other offices with a view to saving as much as we possibly can on this item of furniture.


Edmond Proulx: But I cannot see where they put all the furniture. They have not been opening so many offices as that. Go through the Auditor General's Report for
1914, and you will see the record
9 p.m. of the purchase of many, many articles-desks, chairs, couches; they seem to have a great liking for couches; apparently they have a great disposition to sleep. Even, they have " diners," Do they get their meals brought to their offices? I do not suppose that they are so busy that they could not go to a boarding-house.


William Erskine Knowles: What does the term
"dinners" mean?


Robert Rogers: I could not tell my hon. friend. It must be a clerical error.


William Erskine Knowles: Will the minister get
the information?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Edmond Proulx: The Minister of Public Works seems more saving for himself than for his colleagues.


Robert Rogers: Thank you.


William Erskine Knowles: He does not sleep.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Perhaps he is not in his office.


Edmond Proulx: The Minister of Marine
and Fisheries (Mr. Hazen) has been more saving than the Secretary of State (Mr. Coderre), but I find that in his case the Office Specialty Manufacturing Company sold quite -a number of articles for a total of $581.50-mostly office furniture.


Rodolphe Lemieux: How about couches?


Edmond Proulx: I do not find any couches. He does not seem disposed to sleep.
Public Buildings-Ottawa Victoria Memorial Museum, $200,000.
Mr! LEMIEUX: Is that for the tower?


Robert Rogers: Hon. gentlemen are
familiar with the conditions there: the foundation has been sinking and it is necessary to support it. We have a report from Mr. Monserrat, a copy of which, I believe, has been laid on the table. It is necessary that this work should be taken up immediately, and it is estimated that it will cost * $200,000. That is why the estimate is increased to this amount.


Frank Oliver: Is it intended to take the
tower over?


Robert Rogers: No, they think they can
get along without that. The tower is rather breaking aw-ay from the main building. It is suggested by some that it is dangerous,

but Mr. Monserrat thinks there is no immediate danger, and that if the work is undertaken this summer it will be all right.
Public Buildings-Toronto-new Dominion buildings, $225,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Is this for the new customs house?


Robert Rogers: No, for the general post office.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What will you do with the old building?


Robert Rogers: It is to be removed.


William Erskine Knowles: Are the plans prepared for this Toronto building?


Robert Rogers: Only sketch plans.


William Erskine Knowles: Is there any estimate of final cost?


Robert Rogers: Not yet.


William Erskine Knowles: I think that before we are called upon to pass the preliminary vote we should have some idea of what the Government has in mind. It is hardly right to vote a hundred thousand and not know how many millions we shall have to spend before we stop.


Robert Rogers: I do not think it will be necessary to go to the millions.


William Erskine Knowles: But the principle still holds. Before the Government asks us to launch out on a contract, they ought to give us at least some rough estimate of the expenditure that will be involved.


Robert Rogers: We are not yet in possession of information that I could give my hon. friend; pending the receipt of reports from the architect and from others in charge of the work, we do not know exactly what the cost will be. We are only going to put up such a building as will meet the requirements of the public interest. I do not think the cost will be more than a million dollars.


Edmond Proulx: I observe that the
Government supply the residences of deputy ministers, secretaries and other officers of the various departments with free telephone service. Is it customary to pay for telephones at the residences of these officials?


Robert Rogers: It has always been the practice.


Edmond Proulx: On what principle does the Government pay for these telephones?


Robert Rogers: On the principle that the deputy ministers find it necessary and in the public interest to have telephones at their residences, to be used in connection with their departmental work. It was thought a good many years ago that this would be an advisable extension of the departmental telephone service, and the same practice is carried on to-day.


Edmond Proulx: There might be occasion for a telephone at the residence of a deputy minister, but the other officers of the department are' employed only during the day, and I do not see why their telephones should be paid for.
Harbours and rivers-Esquimau dry dock, $250,000.


William Pugsley: What has been done in connection with this work?


Robert Rogers: We have purchased a site alongside the old dock at Lang's cove. The plans are not yet complete, but when they are ready they will be transmitted to the Admiralty for approval. Only $250,000, therefore, is put in at present for this proposed work.


William Pugsley: What is the size of the proposed dry dock?


Robert Rogers: 1,150 feet by 110 feet. The plan of the dock at Quebec is followed as closely as possible.
French river waterway improvements, $500000.


William Pugsley: Is it proposed to go ahead with this work during the present year?


Robert Rogers: This is one of the works that may well, I think, stand for the present year. It is not the intention to press it this year.


George Ewan McCraney: I understand that the Minister of Finance looks forward to an expenditure in the neighbourhood of $50,000,000 on capital account for public bn>
Icings and that sort of thing. If I understood the Finance Minister's Budget aright, he expects to raise $30,000,000; about $10,000,000 from the special taxation and about $20,000,000 from the increased duties. If the whole sum of $50,000,000 were expended, the $30,000,000. which I have mentioned would be entirely exhausted, and it would be necessary to borrow besides another $20,000,000. The Minister of Public Works has certain items in the Estimates, the works connected with which he does not intend to proceed with this year. Has

the minister made any estimate as to the amount of these items?


Robert Rogers: We have not made any such statement as my hon. friend suggests. Our whole estimate of expenditure, including capital account, is only $32,000,000.
Port Arthur and Fort William harbour and river improvements, $1,500,000.


Frank Oliver: How much has been spent on harbour improvements at Port Arthur and Fort William?


Robert Rogers: The total expenditure up to March last was $8,500,000.


John Howard Sinclair: Is the harbour owned altogether by the Government?


Robert Rogers: Yes, entirely.
Mr. DEViLIN: With reference to the French river waterway improvements, why is it that the whole of the amount voted last year was not expended?


Robert Rogers: We were only able to proceed with the dam at Chaudiere last year.


Mr. DEVLIN:: I understood that the
vote was for the construction of the Georgian Bay canal.


Robert Rogers: To some extent that was the purpose of the vote. Practically my hon. friend is right, but all the work we were able to do was the dam.
Public Works-Quebec harbour-dry-dock at Lauzon, $700,000.


Charles Marcil: When will this dock be
ready?


Robert Rogers: We did hope that it would be ready this summer. We are now pressing the contractor to get it ready by this fall.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Has the excavation work been started?


Robert Rogers: It is well under way.


Charles Marcil: Is the old dry-dock in use at present?


Robert Rogers: 
Charles Marcil: Is that work under way?


Robert Rogers: Yes. This is to finish it.
Public Works-Quebec harbour-improvements, $500,000.


Charles Marcil: What work is going on
under this vote?	*


Robert Rogers: This is for the wharf that was proposed near Champlain Market. The item was originally in the Railway Estimates as part of the Transcontinental scheme, but it has been transferred to the Public Works Department. The railway part of the scheme has been completed, and we are asking for the money because the wharf is considered necessary.


William Pugsley: Is it intended to go on with that work?


Robert Rogers: I do not think we shall
do much at it this year, but with the money we shall be in a position to go on with the contract if necessary.


Charles Marcil: Has any contract been
awarded for this work?


Robert Rogers: Yes. The contract was
awarded a few years ago by the late Gov-enment.


Charles Marcil: Has the work been proceeding all this time?


Robert Rogers: The contract included
the construction of a wharf, and the building of a railway from where the railway crosses the river. Some diversion was made in the contract with the result that the railway end of it was carried out, but not the dock end of it. This item is to enable us to go on with the wharf if necessary.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What is the name of
the contractor?


Robert Rogers: Davis had the contract.


William Pugsley: If I remember rightly
it was intended to erect the terminal of the Transcontinental at the Champlain market, but after a consultation with the engineers we thought that would be a very desirable place for piers for some of the ocean steamers. That is why that amount was provided at that time. I suppose that the changing of the site of the terminal station has modified the views of the Government as to where the improvements should be made?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Public Works-Quebec harbour-River St. Charles-improvements to navigation, $500,000.


George William Kyte: I would ask the minister to let this item stand until we get the information in regard to Mr. Gobeil's report.


Robert Rogers: All right.
Item stands.

Public Works-St. John harbour, N.B.-improvements, $1,500,000.


William Pugsley: Would die minister
state how the $3,000,000 that was spent last year was divided? What portion was spent on dredging on the west side, how many cubic yards of dredging weTe done, what was the price per cubic yard, what amount of wharf building was done, what was the cost of the temporary warehouses, and how much was spent on the breakwater and on dredging in Courtenay bay?


Robert Rogers: I have the reports of the officers of the department here, Tout they are" very lengthy. I shall be glad to send them over to my hon. friend.


William Pugsley: Perhaps the minister
would hand it to Hansard.


Robert Rogers: I shall be very glad to do that.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Had Michael Connolly
the contract for any of this work at St. John?


Robert Rogers: Yes, for the wharves on the west side.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What was the amount of the contract?	.


Robert Rogers: Something like $1,250,000. The contract was afterwards transferred to the Maritime Dredging Company, who were able to complete the contract in time, and, I think, to the satisfaction of the people of St. John.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What was the reason
for transferring the contract, and how much did Mr. Connolly get for the work he did?


Robert Rogers: Mr. Connolly received
$605,000 for the portion of the work he did. The department thought he was not likely to complete the contract in time, and so it was handed over to the Maritime Dredging Company, as they were able to carry on the work more speedily.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Does Mr. Connolly claim any extra payment?


Robert Rogers: No, he was.quite satisfied, I think.


William Pugsley: I think that after the
contract was given to the Maritime Dredging Company a change was made in the specifications to permit of substitution of southern timber for Canadian timber, and also change as to the mode in which the crib should be built. I should like to ask whether that is correct, and whether the

new contractors were permitted to substitute a good deal of dredging material in place of rock. I understand that that was permitted.


Robert Rogers: A change was made in the specifications in regard to timber in order to get the work completed within the time limit. It meant an additional cost of something like $40,000. As to filling, dredged material was used for back filling.


William Pugsley: I am told that dredged material was used for filling in the cribs.


Robert Rogers: No, for back filling only.


William Pugsley: What was the cost of
the warehouses?


William Pugsley: What is the cost of the temporary warehouse?


John Douglas Hazen: The engineer tells me that the whole cost of the warehouse is $27,000.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I would like to ask the
minister if the work performed by Mr. Michael Connolly was accepted by the department as satisfactory? I understand that it was only the question of the delay which caused the transference of the work from Mr. Connolly to the Maritime Dredging Company. I understand that Mr. Connolly is a good contractor.


Robert Rogers: The principal difficulty was that Mr. Connolly was not proceeding with the work as rapidly as it was thought it should be proceeded with. There was great pressure for the earliest possible completion of this dock in the city of St. John. We were bound to have it completed last fall before the business started and, owing to the reports of the engineers who were sent to examine it, we thought it was going to be impossible, at the rate at which he was carrying on the work, to have it completed in time. That was the reason if was taken from him.


William Pugsley: In order to enable the new contractors to hasten the work and finish it in the required time they were allowed, at an extra cost to the department, to substitute southern timber for Canadian timber. Was such a proposal as that ever made to Mr. Connolly to enable him to hurry on the work?


Robert Rogers: It was impossible to get the local timber in any case, and Mr. Connolly would have had that same right if he had been able to go on and complete the work


William Pugsley: Was there any proposal to that effect ever made to Mr. Connolly?


Robert Rogers: The chief engineer says that before we reached that point it had been taken out of Mr. Connolly's hands because he was not getting on as fast as he should have.


William Pugsley: Does not the minister see that Mr. Connolly was treated unjustly, because, according to the minister's own statement, it was impossible to get the matter settled in time to get the timber which was required by the specifications? Without suggesting to Mr. Connolly that he would be allowed to use southern pine, the contract was taken out of his hands because he was not proceeding with sufficient rapidity and it was given to the Maritime Dredging Company and, concurrently with that, the class of timber to be used was changed and they were allowed $40,000 more than Mr. Con. nolly was to get. Does the minister not think that was something of an injustice to Mr. Connolly?


Robert Rogers: The position was simply this, that we had repeatedly impressed upon Mr. Connolly the necessity of making more rapid progress than he was making with this contract and when the engineers reported that there was no chance of him having it completed in the time prescribed by the contract, an arrangement was made with him by which his work was taken over. He had arranged with others for a local timber but it was discovered that it was utterly impossible to get delivery of the timber and it was absolutely necessary on the part of the new contractor to go on and get the timber in order to have the work completed in time for last year's business. It was a matter that was entirely beyond the control of the department. We could not do anything else to have the work completed and if we had not secured this timber the contract would not have been completed in time.


William Pugsley: Was not Mr. Connolly doing the very best possible to get the timber required by the specifications when the contract was taken out of his hands?


Robert Rogers: I do not know; he may have been doing that, but he was not getting on with the work as fast as the department thought he should.


William Pugsley: What happened? It was taken out of his hands, given to new contractors, and they were at once told that
they need not carry out the specifications, that they could get timber different from that which Mr. Connolly was obliged to get. When they got the timber that they could get more easily than the timber required by the specifications, the department allowed the new contractors an extra sum of $40,000. They allowed him to get timber which it was easier to get, and they paid him $40,000 more.


Robert Rogers: That was not exactly the case. The representations which prompted the department to make the change in the timber came from the city of St. John itself. The city of St. John pressed this upon the Government. Understanding the local conditions, they brought to the attention of the department the fact that the only hope of having the contract completed was by getting the class of timber that we did get in order to carry on the work.
Mr, PUGSLEY: I have understood that Mr. Connolly's complaint-and he makes a very strong complaint-is that he was not given the same chance as the new contractors were given. If he had been allowed to substitute southern timber he could have got along just as rapidly as the new contractors did. However, I suppose the minister has said all he can upon it. I would like to ask as to the depth of the dredging which has been done upon the west side.


Robert Rogers: Thirty-two feet.


William Pugsley: And for the crib site?


Robert Rogers: Thirty-five feet.


William Pugsley: Has there been no dredging done outside of the crib site to thirty-five feet?


Robert Rogers: The engineer says that he has no knowledge of such.


William Pugsley: I would like to mention this fact for the minister's information: Other gentlemen were formerly interested in the Maritime Dredging Company who were the previous contractors. They conferred with me about going to a depth of thirty-five feet. I thought that, not only for the crib site but for the basin, it was desirable to dredge to a depth of thirty-five feet, and I so authorized the engineer, Mr. Scammell. I expected to have an Order in Council passed giving authority for this work. I understand that the dredging to a depth of thirty-five feet was done, but it has not been paid for by reason of it being alleged that the company went below depth.

My own view. is that as there is considerable silting in the harbour it would be desirable to go to a sufficient depth to avoid the necessity of dredging again in the near, future. Has the minister's attention been called to that claim?


Robert Rogers: I have no recollection of ever having had my attention called to that particular matter. I quite appreciate what my hon. friend says in regard to the matter of silting in the harbour of St. John, and in my judgment care should be taken to see that the depth should be great enough. At all events, I shall be very glad to look into the matter that the hon. gentleman refers to.


John Douglas Hazen: Has any claim been put in?


William Pugsley: There has been a claim put in. Mr. James A. Bulyea was in Ottawa and saw me in reference to the matter.


John Douglas Hazen: He did not see me. I have never heard anything albout any claim being made.


William Pugsley: He was here for some days and endeavoured to get the matter settled.


John Douglas Hazen: I never saw him.
Mr. PUGSLEY': I thought he would have seen the minister.


Robert Rogers: I shall be very glad to look into it.


William Pugsley: I am pleased to hear the minister say that. I feel a certain amount of responsibility in connection with it, for the reason that perhaps I ought to have expedited it before the late Government went out of office and had the Order m Council passed. Mr. Scammell held the opinion that it was very desirable to dredge to that depth in the basin. Has it been arranged that the drydock should be of the same dimensions as those which will be built at Quebec and Esquimalt?


Robert Rogers: My hon. friend is familiar with the original conditions under which a dry dock of 900 feet was proposed, but the department suggested a dry dock of 1,150 feet similar to those at Halifax and Quebec. This has been brought to ihe attention of the Norton Griffiths Company, the contractors, but they have not yet signified their willingness to carry it out. The matter is now under consideration, and I believe will be adjusted. I am free to ac-

knowledge that undoubtedly the port of St. John ought to have and must have a dry dock of similar size to those at Halifax and Quebec.


William Pugsley: I am very glad indeed to hear the statement of the minister, because I think it would be desirable to build a dry dock of 1,150 feet at St. John, not merely that it may be as larve as those at Quebec and Esquimalt and Halifax, but because of the convenience of dividing it into sections so that vessels of different sizes can be taken care of to advantage. A great deal of shipping comes to the port of St. John, and the business is increasing every year. I think the minister will make no mistake if he arranges for a dry dock of a larger size.


Robert Rogers: My idea was that I did not regard it as fair that the port of St. John should have a smaller dry dock than that in Quebec or in Halifax, because I felt that ships which require the largest possible 'dry dock should have the same opportunity of coming to St. John as they would have to Halifax and Quebec. I thought, therefore, in fairness to the port of St. John, that it should have a dry dock of the same size.


William Pugsley: When the late Government laid down the policy of assisting in the construction of dry docks by giving an annual subsidy for a period of years, the different (ports were placed in the same position and it was anticipated that dry docks should be built by companies. With this understanding, the different ports had the same opportunity, through private enterprise, of securing the construction of dry docks, but now that the Government is determined to build dry docks as Government works at Quebec and Halifax, which are, of course, competing ports with St, John, the minister can easily see that a difficulty would be thrown in the way of a dry dock being constructed at St. John by private enterprise. Of course, Government dty docks have the advantages of cheap rates which the Government necessarily feels called upon to give to those using the docks, and a dock owned by a private company is not nearly so likely to be a successful enterprise, as it would if it were in competition only with eompany-owned docks. I would like the minister to consider that circumstance, and perhaps he may decide that it would be desirable to construct the dry dock at St. John as a Government work,

as the dry docks at Halifax, Quebec and Esquimalt are being constructed.


Robert Rogers: There is a good deal of force in the suggestion of my hon. friend, but at the same time I find myself in the position of having a contract with a reputable company for the carrying out of the construction of this particular dry dock at St. John, and I do not know that it would he possible to make any change. However, the matter will be fully considered.
Toronto harbour improvements, $1,000,000.


Edmond Proulx: I understood they were to dredge in the bay there, and deposit the material taken out on the shore.


Robert Rogers: That is quite right.


Edmond Proulx: Have they done much of that work?


Robert Rogers: They are building their dredges, and will get started very shortly.
Vancouver harbour improvements, $1,000,000.


William Pugsley: What is this vote for?


Robert Rogers: It is for a very important public wharf between Salisbury and Commercial streets.


William Pugsley: We voted $1,000,000 last year, and there is this year $1,000,000, which seems a great deal of money for a wharf whei e there is no dredging to be done. What is the length of the wharf?


Robert Rogers: 800 feet long and 300 feet wide.


William Pugsley: 800 feet oat in the water?


Robert Rogers: Yes, and the vote includes dredging at False creek as well.


Charles Marcil: Is it a concrete wharf?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Charles Marcil: Any British Columbia pine in it?


Robert Rogers: Yes, there is some in the foundations.
Mr. MeKENZIE: Has the Halifax dry-dock been taken over by the Government?


Robert Rogers: The proposed new dry dock has nothing to do with the old dry dock.
Mr. MeKENZIE: Is it near where the old dry dock was?


Robert Rogers: It is across the Hver on the Dartmouth side, which was selected by the engineers as the most suitable.
Public buildings-Nova Scotia, $365,000.


Robert Rogers: These are just the same Estimates as were passed last year; there is nothing new in them.


William Pugsley: I wish to ask a question about the Amherst post office. What was the cost of the site?


Robert Rogers: 


William Pugsley: What is the size of the lot?


Robert Rogers: 93 by 95.


William Pugsley: It is only fair to say to the minister that my information is that that land was purchased by some parties not very long ago, before it was acquired by the Government, for $15,000, and the Government decided to take the property and. build a new post office. Expropriation proceedings were commenced; but when the case was about to come to trial, the Crown settled with the owners at $30,000, the price which the minister named. That was double what the property cost the purchasers a comparatively short time before and after there was an agitation for the erection of a new post office. $30,000 seems a very high price for the property.


Mr. RHODES:: Inasmuch as the matter
refers to my constituency and has been brought up by my hon. friend from St. John (Mr. Pugsley) perhaps I may be permitted to say a word or two. There is nothing in the record of the department to show the price paid for the land by the vendor to the Government. As a matter of fact, there is no secret about it. I think the price is somewhat in the neighbourhood of $$16,000 to $17,000. That is what it represented to the vendor in his outlay plus interest.


William Pugsley: The party purchased for $16,000 or $17,000 the property for which the Crown paid $30,000. That would represent a profit to the vendor of some $13,000. What is the name of the gentleman who made the profit of $13,000?


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Mr. H. G. Hagen. This information is, I believe, accurate. The whole point is whether or not the Government paid a fair price for the land, and speaking for myself, I have absolutely no doubt that the Government got the land at a fair and reasonable price. The site is in the heart of the town of Amherst, which has a population of about 11,000, and which, if it continues to grow at the rate at which it was growing two years ago, will in 1920 have

a population of about 20,000. The price paid for the land represents $325 per front foot, with a depth of 93 feet. There is also in the rear a right of way 12 feet wide, which practically means that the lot is 105 feet in depth for the purpose of the post office. Land immediately in front of this site has been purchased by people for their own use as a business site. In one instance a lot 75 feet in depth was purchased a year before by a merchant who paid $525 per front foot. In another case, within nine months of the purchase of this piece of land by the Government, a lot 50 feet in depth, without any right of way at the rear opposite this lot and not more than 75 feet down the street, was bought by a merchant for $450 per front foot for his own private use. Perhaps land upon the side of the street on which this lot is situated is not quite as valuable as it is on the other side; but for the purpose of a post office site to the Government, it is quite as valuable and possibly more so, inasmuch at it is hoped to use the old post office building for a customs house and the new post office is to be used for the post office, and both being upon the same side of the street, it will enable a more advantageous exchange of parcels between the post office and the customs house and vice versa. With respect to the question whether a post office ought to be built or not, I think that matter was gone into last year. The Post Office Department itself felt, even before the parcel post system was installed, which called for additional room, that the business of the town was growing so rapidly that the post office was crowded, and it asked the Public Works Department for an increase in facilities. An engineer was sent down, through no effort of my own, but as a matter of departmental routine, and he prepared a plan which, according to his own estimate, called for the expenditure of $40,000, although it meant simply an addition to the existing building and only a makeshift which would provide for the needs of the town for only a short time and which would not be sufficient for the accommodation which the growth would call for in a few years. Therefore, it was felt that, instead of spending $40,000 and having post office accommodation which would last only a few years, and inferior accommodation for the customs house, it would be better to spend a few more thousand dollars and have first-class accommodation for both the pest office and the customs. Therefore it 
is in the public interest that the department has decided upon the erection of a new post office.


William Pugsley: How long before the
Government expropriated this property was it that Mr. Hazen bought the site for $16,000?
Mr. RHODES; Perhaps six or nine months. I am speaking from memory, and I have had no occasion to refresh my memory.


William Pugsley: Some six or nine months before the Government expropriated the property, it had been bought by this gentleman for an amount which my hon. friend says with interest would reach $16,000 or $17,000, and the Government paid this gentleman something over $30,000 for it. Before I left office, there was an order, which I feel sure is on record in the department, that all examiners must state any recent transfers of property which had been purchased.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: That was carried out.


William Pugsley: [DOT] My hon. friend said there was no record in the department of the cost. Therefore it could not have been carried out.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I had not that in mind at the time I was speaking, but I am inclined to think it will be found that the report of the inspector will disclose the cost.


William Pugsley: I gave a general order
to the inspector that all examiners must state any recent transfers of property which had been purchased. Will the minister be good enough to produce the report of the examiner at a convenient time before these Estimates finally pass?


Robert Rogers: We shall be glad to produce any reports we have, but an error appears to have crept in here. This particular property was expropriated by the department. The matter was referred to the Exchequer Court, and the price of $385 per foot was fixed by the judge of the Exchequer Court, not by the department.


William Pugsley: My information is that the price was settled by agreement.


Robert Rogers: My information is that it was fixed by the Exchequer Court.


William John Macdonald: The order was passed by consent. I remember seeing it at the time the court was sitting in Halifax.


William Pugsley: That is a pretty big profit.


Robert Rogers: When the department referred the matter to the Exchequer Court and the order came back placing a value of $30,000 on the property we had not any more to say.


William Pugsley: Surely the counsel for the Crown would not consent to have a valuation without consulting the minister.


Robert Rogers: When this property was valued by the officers of the Public Works Department, they set a value of $325 a foot. It was referred to the Exchequer Court, and after the judge had given, it consideration, he came to the conclusion that the price suggested by the officer of $325 a foot was fair and reasonable, and that was his finding.


William Pugsley: I think the minister is misinformed. My information is that the judge passed no judgment, but the counsel for the Crown accepted this price:


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I know something of the circumstances of this case. As a matter of fact, the Government inspectors and valuators were convinced that the price was fair and reasonable, as I was and am. But I found out, when the purchase was proposed to be made, that the price which had been paid by the vendor was a good deal different from the price which he was about to receive from the Government, and I suggested that the matter be sent to the Exchequer Court. *My letter will probably be found on the files. I said, that while I had no doubt as to the value of the land, yet, in order to avoid all suspicion, I should like to see the question go to the Exchequer Court. At the sittings of the court held in Halifax last autumn, the case was called and a number of witnesses were there ready to proceed. Judge Cassels was presiding. He asked what was the point in the case; and the counsel for the Government-who was not the man it had been proposed should represent the Government, but, I believe, had been called in a very short time before the case was heard-said that the Government had offered $325 a front foot, but the vendor was asking something like $400 a foot. The judge said: " I think that $325 a foot is a reasonable price," or something of that kind, and suggested that the vendor should accept it. There was a conference, and the vendor agreed to accept the price, and judgment went on that ground.


William Pugsley: Without evidence?


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: One witness was called as a matter of fact. So far as I am concerned,
I welcome any inquiry with regard to this land; there is no mystery about
10 p.m. it. I have no hesitation in going on record as saying that I believe the Government got good value for its money.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: What is the population?


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Eleven thousand, and growing rapidly.


Charles Marcil: The population is not growing just now.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: No, for the same reason that other towns are not growing-for the same reason that the city of Montreal is not growing. And I want to say, what hon. members know full well, that many towns in other parts of Canada, especially towns in the West, having only half the population .of Amherst, would think that land was going ridiculously cheap if as good sites as this were bought within their borders for $325 a foot.


William Pugsley: It is an unfortunate thing, when hon: gentlemen wanted to go to the Exchequer Court to allay suspicion, that they did not allow evidence in the matter.


Robert Rogers: That was for the judge to
say.


William Pugsley: The counsel for the
Crown consented to pay $325 a food. Will the minister please bring down the information that has been asked for?


Charles Marcil: Is the post office going to cost $70,000 besides the cost of the land?


Robert Rogers: It will cost $63,000 besides the land.


William Pugsley: Does that include the fittings?


Robert Rogers: No,


William Pugsley: It will probably run over $70,000.
Amherst-drill hall, $10,000.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Seventy thousand dollars was voted last year. Will this drill hall cost more than $70,000?


Robert Rogers: It will cost altogether $108,000.


Charles Marcil: How many regiments are
there there?


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: There is one regiment for the county-the 93rd Battalion. And at the



time the Government agreed to construct the drill hall, I put in an application for tne formation of a city regiment for the town of Amherst and have been pressing upon the minister for weeks and weeks to get the Order in Council passed necessary to form this regiment. We .have the list of officers complete and are ready to go ahead ar.d complete the establishment. When tiiat is done there will be two regiments.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: Does that mean that
$105,000 is to be spent for a drill hall for a regiment in Amherst before that regiment is formed?


Robert Rogers: No.


William John Macdonald: There is no regiment in Amherst. There is the 93rd Battalion, a regiment for the county, with headquarters at Springhill, where there is an armoury.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: That armoury cost about $2,000, and there ought to be a better building there. If I am spared to represent the county for a few years to come, I will make every effort to'see that a first-class drill hall ig put up in Springhill. I may add that there is no county in Canada in which this expenditure would be more warranted than in Cumberland, for I do not know of any county that, in proportion to its population, has contributed as many men for the overseas contingent. In the last recruiting for the third contingent, the town of Amherst recruited about as many men as either Halifax or St. John-at all events, within one or two of as many as Halifax.


George William Kyte: Not as many as the county of Cape Breton, where there is no armoury.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: The county of Cape Breton has three times our population.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: I do not wish to delay the minister's Estimates, but it does seem objectionable that $70,000 has already been spent, and more is to'be spent, on a drill shed for a regiment, which, as I understand, the minister has not yet been authorized.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: The drill hall is in use to-day.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: That is what I want to know.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: It has been used for weeks past as an instructional school for officers for overseas contingents. Every day it is being used in connection with the mobilization of troops. We have the honour to have in the town of Amherst at the present

time the 22nd French Canadian regiment, and perhaps I may be permitted to say, for the benefit of our friends from the province of Quebec, that the people of Amherst are delighted with the physique and the appearance of the men of this regiment. Every letter I receive is loud in its praises of the men, not only as soldiers, but as men; their conduct has been exemplary in every respect.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: I thank the hon. member for his kind comment. It is natural that the men from the province of Quebec-I except, of course, present company-should be men of fine physique. We are glad to know that the French Canadians have visited the town of Amherst. Can the hon. gentleman tell me how many officers use that drill hall?


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: There are probably 150 officers in the town at the present time. The 22nd French Canadian regiment, which is composed almost entirely of Roman Catholics, has not had a building sufficiently large for the purposes of worship, and they have been using the building on Sundays for church purposes. It has been used also for quartermaster's stores; I believe, that every inch of space in the building has been used for weeks past in connection with the presence in the town of the 22nd French Canadian regiment.	.


William Pugsley: The Minister of Militia informed the House that a portion of the factory buildings had .been rented by the Government for the purposes of the troops.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: The minister did not inform the House any such thing. A portion of the Canadian Car and Foundry Company's buildings there is being used as quarters for the men; the drill hall would not accommodate one quarter of the regiments which consist of nearly 2,000 men. No rent is being paid; no one has been asked for the payment of rent, and no one is expected to pay it. There will be, I presume, small payments for such damage as has been done to the building and any expense to which the company has been put by reason of the occupation, but this compensation will be small.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Why were these men taken from large centres like Montreal and Quebec and sent to a comparatively small place like Amherst?


Robert Rogers: That is a matter which comes under the control of the Militia Department.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: The move was made at
the request of the colonel in command of the regiment. It was felt that these men, who were in St. John, were rather too near their homes to enable the best discipline to be enforced and the best training to be obtained. They had to be moved some distance away, and there was no better place to take them to than the town of Amherst.
I am very glad to have been instrumental in pointing out to the minister the advantages of the. town of Amherst in this respect.
Bridgetown, post office, $4,000.


William Pugsley: Is it intended to go on with this work during the present year?


Robert Rogers: It is hoped that we may be able to do so later.


William Pugsley: Have the plans been
prepared?


Robert Rogers: Not yet.


William Pugsley: Has the land been purchased?


Robert Rogers: Not yet.


William Pugsley: It is a revote?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Canning public building, $15,000.


John Howard Sinclair: Has any progress been made with this work?


Robert Rogers: I understand that expropriation proceedings are being taken, but nothing has been settled up to date.


John Howard Sinclair: Has anything been done towards erecting the building?


Robert Rogers: No.


John Howard Sinclair: The minister will remember that a rather interesting story was told, I think by the hon. member for Richmond, in regard to this matter last session. He pointed out that Sir Frederick Borden had offered a free site which, if I remember the story correctly, was in a suitable place in the town of Canning. This site was approved at a public meeting held in the town; Sir Frederick Borden was thanked for his generous, offer and a description of the site was sent to the minister, who acknowledged receipt of the offer. It appears, however, that certain political friends of one Mr. Eaton were anxious that a site should be purchased from him, and I understand that the department was pressed to conclude a bargain with Mr. Eaton for the purchase from him of a piece of land which many of the inhabitants 125J
thought was entirely unsuitable for the purpose. Mr. Eaton was to receive $2,000 for this site. When the land was measured it was found to be not large enough, and it became necessary to incorporate with Mr. Eaton's land a piece of land adjoining, which also belonged tor Sir Frederick Borden. The department offered Sir Frederick Borden $1,100 for the strip of land which was to be added to Mr. Eaton's land, but Sir , Frederick said that $1,100 was altogether too much. He refused the offer, and I understand that a suit as to the value of the land was brought by the department and defended by Sir Frederick Borden.
. Evidently the reason why the department was pushing the $1,100 on Sir Frederick was, as they said in the correspondence, to take the curse off the Eaton lot.
As they had estimated the lot adjoining Sir Frederick's at $2,000, they thought Sir Frederick should be paid proportionally $1,100 for his strip. I understand Sir Frederick resisted the offer and went to law about it with the department. It would be interesting to know the result of that trial. Has it been settled yet?


Robert Rogers: It has not been settled, at all. I am not acquainted with the details, but I know that no suit has been brought in the Exchequer Court.


Mr. DOUGLAS:: I should like to know what the policy of the department is in regard to post office buildings. I understand that Canning is a village of only 500 or 600 people, yet here is an appropriation for a public building there costing $15,000. Prior to 1911 a site was purchased by the late Government for a post office in the town of Camrose in my own constituency. It is a very thriving little place with a population of 2,000, and with all the modern facilities that are to be found in our western towns. I have repeatedly asked the Minister of Public Works for a building suitable to the requirements of the town, but I can get no satisfaction whatever. Camrose has seven railways radiating from it, and yet the post office is located in a rented building, although the Government has had a site purchased ever since 1910. It looks to me as if the erection of public buildings was merely a political move, and this is rather a glaring case. Without any reason or justification whatever, the demands of the progressive people of a flourishing little town like Camrose are ignored and places with one-tenth the

population, Bear River for instance, are getting public buildings.


Robert Rogers: My hon. friend is in error in respect to Canning. I see the population is 1,000.


George William Kyte: That is the whole polling subdivision.


Robert Rogers: My hon. friend says he has been pressing upon me the erection of a public building at Camrose. I must confess I have no recollection of it at the moment.


James McCrie Douglas: I am sorry I have to refresh the minister's memory, but the minister faithfully promised me two years ago that a building would be put up there.


Robert Rogers: If I did, it must be done.
Public Buildings, N.S.-Chester public building, $15,000.


William Pugsley: What is the population of Chester?


Robert Rogers: It is a summer resort. I see its population in summer is 1,096.


George William Kyte: Chester is not an incorporated town. It is a village with a population of about 400. The figures given by the minister are the census returns for the polling subdivision.


Robert Rogers: The information I have
here is that it is a town of 1,096. It is noted for its beautitful scenery, making it one of the most delightful summer resorts, nine miles distance from the finest views the country affords. The town has five churches, express and telegraph offices, saw-mills, three hotels and twenty-one stores. It is quite an important place.


William Pugsley: Is it intended to do
anything with this money this year?


Robert Rogers: We hope to.
*iJlalifaX customs examining warehouse, $100,000.


John Howard Sinclair: Is that a new building?


Robert Rogers: Yes, it has not been
started yet. The plans are not prepared, but wre hope to erect the building within this amount.


William Pugsley: I presume nothing will be done this year.	[DOT]


Robert Rogers: The plans have not been prepared.
$45^00(faX	^la9 for 63rd Regiment,
[Mr. Douglas.!


John Howard Sinclair: Is this a second drill
hall?


Robert Rogers: Apparently. Nothing lias been done yet in connection with the work.


John Howard Sinclair: Is it intended to have a drill hall for each regiment?


Robert Rogers: Halifax is quite a-military city.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: What will be the total cost of the drill hall?


Robert Rogers: I have no idea. The plans are not prepared yet.


Charles Marcil: Has the site been pur-purchased?


Robert Rogers: The proposal is that the
regiment should contribute the site.
Hantsport public building, $9,000.


William Pugsley: I see that is a revote.
Will anything be done this year? Has the land been bought?


Robert Rogers: The site has been purchased, but the plans have not been pre-.pared.	-
Mahone Bay public building, $2,000.


George William Kyte: What is the population of Mahone Bay?


Robert Rogers: 951.


Charles Marcil: What is the total amount to be expended there?


Robert Rogers: This $2,000 is for the site. Plans have not been drawn up for the building. We shall gpve careful consideration to the price and spend no more than is necessary in the public interest. Mahone Bay is in the constituency of Lunenburg.


Charles Marcil: Are there any public buildings in that constituency at present?


Robert Rogers: I am not acquainted with the different towns.


George William Kyte: There is one in the town of Lunenburg and one in the town of Bridgewater.


Charles Marcil: I have heard at least two or three of the minister's predecessors say that every constituency in Canada should have at least one public building. I know some constituencies that have none. Votes were put in the Estimates for, some of these places, but afterwards struck out. I see other constituencies are getting two or three public buildings.

* Mr. KYTE: This is the same constituency Chester is in; so this will make four public buildings for the constituency of Lunenburg.
Middleton public building, $15,000.


Charles Marcil: What constituency is
that in?


Robert Rogers: Annapolis.


Charles Marcil: Is that the total amount to be expended there?


Robert Rogers: I think this amount
should be sufficient for a public building in a town of that size.


William Pugsley: Has land been purchased?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
North Sydney public building-improvements, $5,000.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: What improvements do you propose to make in North Sydney?


Robert Rogers: An addition to examining warehouse, front porch, additional windows and tower clock.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I am glad the minister is putting in the tower clock. There were three clocks in prospect; one was put in at Baddeck and it was intended to put one in at North Sydney and Sydney. It is about time that the minister was making an extension to the building at North Sydney. He is paying a pretty high rent there for the building that is now being used as an examining warehouse. They refused to rent the building from the real owner because he. was not of the right stripe or colour. The owner had to rent his place to a middleman at $15 a monh, and the middleman immediately rented it to the department at $30 a month. The minister will find that to be the case from the records in the Department of Public Works. That is the way the Government business is being done at the present time.
Port Hawkesbury public building, $3,000.


Mr. A. W. CHISHOLM:: Has the site
been purchased for this building?


Robert Rogers: No, nothing has been
done.


Alexander William Chisholm: Has there been any attempt to purchase a site?


Robert Rogers: Yes; we have some correspondence and reports, but nothing has been concluded.


Alexander William Chisholm: Is it the intention oi the minister to proceed with the erection of this building?


Robert Rogers: We shall proceed as fast as we do with any of the others.


Alexander William Chisholm: The erection of this
building has been in contemplation for the last four years. Tins item is quite old. It was in the Estimates in 1911, it remained in 1912, it was dropped in 1913, and now it comes back again. I understand an effort has been made to purchase the site.


Robert Rogers: If we have been working at it as long as that it is about time we got under way.
Shubenacadie public building, $2,000.


George William Kyte: How much is it intended
to expend on this building?


Robert Rogers: The population is 1,516.
The site has not been purchased yet. This amount is only to purchase the site.
Sydney Mines public building-improvements, repairs, etc., $2,500.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Does that include the cost of the tower?


Robert Rogers: Yes, that is for the cost
of the tower.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I hope the minister
will put in both of these clocks during the coming summer.


Robert Rogers: We have a number of
clocks on the way from England and they are expected very shortly. We have given an order for thirty or forty clocks and they are on the way.


Charles Marcil: Where do these clocks
come from?


Robert Rogers: We buy them from three English firms-Evans & Co., Joyce & Co., and Smith & Co.
Buctouche building, $10,000.


William Pugsley: Has the site been purchased?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


William Pugsley: Is anything to be done this year-any plans prepared?


Robert Rogers: The plans are prepared
for some of these buildings in New Brunswick.


William Pugsley: I see that a good many of these votes for New Brunswick public buildings are revotes.	.


Robert Rogers: We are going ahead with the preparation of the plana in the department.
Chatham public building, addition, $12,000.


Mr. LOGGIE:: Are the plans ready for
this building and has anything been done? When will the contract be called for? This item has been in the Estimates for a number of years, the land lying idle and the minister encouraged the belief last year that the work would be undertaken. People in my town would be glad to know what the prospects are for the present year in that regard.


Robert Rogers: My hon. friend will remember that this item was under discussion last June a year ago and he is quite right as to his statement as to what I said then. The plans were given out to be prepared by an outside architect, there was some delay and the work had not been making progress up to the time when the war broke out, since which time very few contracts have been let. That explains why the delay has occurred in carrying out this work. It will go on as soon as possible.


William Stewart Loggie: Can we hope for the work going on this year?


Robert Rogers: You will be entitled to
have the same hope as all others in connection with any works as soon as conditions clear.


William Pugsley: I thought that the Minister of Finance had cleared all the conditions in connection with his new taxes.


Robert Rogers: They will always help.
St. John, N.B.-custom house improvements, $3,000.	.


William Pugsley: What are these improvements?


John Douglas Hazen: Electric lighting.


William Pugsley: I understand that tenders were recently called for electric lighting?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


William Pugsley: I understand that the lowest tenderer has been urging that changes ought to be made which would make his work less expensive, and I am sure the minister will agree with me that it would not be fair to make any changes without calling for new tenders. I think the contractor ought to be compelled to adhere to the original specifications on which he tendered, and if changes are to be made thep, tenders should be called for again. I

mention this especially to the minister so that his attention may be called to it.


Robert Rogers: Tenders were called for and the contract has been let to the lowest tenderer and a certain amount of work has been done by the contractor. He now represents that the specifications wer-e not what they should be and he came to Ottawa and I looked into the matter myself with the result that I have sent the chief electrician to St. John to make a report on the conditions, so that we can decide what is best to be done in the public interest.


William Pugsley: I am sure the minister will agree with me that if a contractor cannot perform his contract the work should be taken from him and new tenders called. There should be no encouragement given to men to tender below what they think the work is worth, in the hope that they may be able to induce the department to make it easier for them later. That apparently is what the contractor is seeking in this case. The others tendered on the understanding that they would be compelled to carry out the specifications to the letter. When I was minister the rule I adopted was that if any changes were to be made the contract should be cancelled and the work let out again to tender, and given to the lowest.


John Douglas Hazen: 
William Pugsley: My information is that there would be a very marked difference in the cost of doing the work if these changes are made which are asked for by the gentleman who was the lowest tenderer. I am also informed that other tenderers inquired of the chief architect as to whether any changes would be allowed, and pointing out the changes which they thought desirable to make, i*nd which could be made without disadvantage, and the chief architect informed one or more of them by wire that no changes would be permitted, and that the work must be done strictly in accordance with the specifications. These gentlemen tendered accordingly. The Minister of Marine must see how unfair it would be_to the others who tendered if these changes were allowed to be made to the advantage of the lowest tenderer. If any changes are to be made the work should again be put up to competition.


John Douglas Hazen: I am simply telling my hon. friend the statements which have been made to me in regard to the matter. The price of the lowest tenderer was just about one-half of that of most of the other tenderers. There was another company which tendered from the city of Ottawa, which was just a few hundred dollars higher than the lowest tenderer which was selected. The gentleman who was awarded the contract states that he is perfectly prepared to carry on the work according to the specifications and that he has no desire to toe relieved of the contract, because he will make a fair margin of profit on it. But, he thinks in view of the strong representations made to him toy the officials in St. John, he ought to report the matter to the Department of Public Works before proceeding.


William Pugsley: If the minister decides to make these changes, in all fairness the work should be put up to tender again and the present contractor paid for what work lie has done.


Robert Rogers: My hon. friend will admit that I have taken the proper course by sending the chief electrician to St. John, and when I get his report I will give it my best consideration.


William Pugsley: That is all I ask of the minister.
*St. George public building, $20,000.


William Pugsley: If I recollect aright, there was an appropriation made for this work when I was minister, and certainly it seems a long time to keep the amount in the Estimates. Is there any reason why this work was not commenced before? It is now upwards of three years since the change of Government, and while it seems as if the Government is desirous of erecting the building by keeping the amount in the Estimates, there should net be such a long -delay in taking steps towards the erection of the building.


Robert Rogers: We have taken steps in connection with it. Tenders have been called for; but the tenders received were thought by the chief architect to be too high, and the matter is under consideration with a view of calling for new tenders to bring the price down to a reasonable figure.


William Pugsley: What were the tenders?


Robert Rogers: One for $36,000 and one for $42,000.


William Pugsley: It is a pity the member for Kings and Albert (Mr. Fowler) does not represent St. George. I am sure he would have no difficulty in getting that tender accepted.
St. John new post office, $75,000.


William Pugsley: Will this expenditure finish the work?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
Beauport public building, $20,000.


Charles Marcil: Has this work been
started?


Robert Rogers: No. We have secured the site.


Charles Marcil: Was this appropriation voted last year for the first time?
19i4


Robert Rogers: I do not remember whether it was voted before last year or not.


Charles Marcil: What is the population of Beauport? It is a country village outside of Quebec.


Robert Rogers: The parish has a population of 3,456.


Charles Marcil: The minister has not the limits of that pariah. It is a pretty large parish.


William Pugsley: Who represents the constituency in which Beauport is situated?


Robert Rogers: The Postmaster General.


William Pugsley: How much is the building to cost?


Robert Rogers: Between $25,000 and $30,000. Tenders were called for; the lowest tender received was $33,000 and the highest $49,000. It was thought by the architect that we could get a building at a little less cost than that.
Bedford public building, $10,000.


Charles Marcil: Has any work been done on this building?


Robert Rogers: No.


Charles Marcil: Has a site been secured?


Robert Rogers: Not yet.
Berthier new public building, $10,000.


Mr. SEGUIN (Translation):: Has the site been secured?


Robert Rogers: No.


Paul-Arthur Séguin: In the estimates of 1912-1913, there was an item of $10,000 for a public building at Saint Lin, a town in the Laurentian country. The population of Saint Lin is larger by >a few hundred than that of Berthier. It was thought advisable to omit the amount which had been put in the Estimates foT the Saint Lin, while an amount was put in for Berthier. I have no objection to an appropriation being made for Berthier, but I protest against the omission of the item fox Saint Lin. I fail to see why the latter place should be discriminated against and its appropriation dropped from the Estimates, * while the item for Berthier is retained.


Robert Rogers: I am glad that my hon. friend approved the site to the appropriation for the town of Berthier, which is an important town of about 1,500 people. I do not know the population of the town to which my hon. friend refers.
[Mr. C. Marcil.l


Paul-Arthur Séguin: The population using the post-office at Saint Lin is a few hundred more than that at Berthier. In any case, I do not wish to rest my complaint on these figures. I do not wish in the least to annoy the department regarding its good treatment of Berthier; on the contrary I am quite gratified at the news that Berthier is getting a public building. But I must protest loudly because the constituency of L'Assomption is not on the part of the Minister of Public Works the objectof the same treatment as the constituency of Berthier. I fail to understand why St. Lin should be discriminated against. The minister is not unaware that an Order-in-Council had been passed for the purchase of the site; the plans and specifications had been prepared. I will ask the minister if he intends one day or another to include once more in the Estimates that item which has been omitted, and thus ensure to this Laurentian town the treatment it is entitled to.


Robert Rogers: While the case of Berthier has been pressed upon me, I am afraid my hon. friend has never pressed for the construction of a public building at St. Lin.


Paul-Arthur Séguin: The minister states that I have not pressed my request. The opposite is the truth. I have never forgotten to bring up the matter .at session after session, so much so that last year I was told that there were more important and more pressing public works than this post office still in abeyance; but I expected at this session to see this item again in the Estimates. I had as a matter of fact asked if it were the minister's intention to carry on this work, and he replied that such was his intention. I therefore conclude that since there arte new grants for Nova Scotia and the other provinces, the same treatment should be meted out to the province of Quebec and particularly St. Lin.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend says that the population of St. Lin is about 400 more than the population of Berthier.


Robert Rogers: The hon. member has not pressed for the erection of a public building at St. Lin. I can appreciate my hon. friend pressing his claim for his town. He will observe, however, that in the present Estimates there are no new items this year; they are all simply revotes.


Paul-Arthur Séguin: I am quite aware that the amount for the Berthier post office was put in the Estimates last year; but when it was put in, the amount for St-

Lin was struck out, and this year the vote for St. Lin was not renewed.


Robert Rogers: When the time comes when we are asking for new votes, we shall be glad to give consideration to the recommendation of my hon. friend.


Paul-Arthur Séguin: As I do not wish to take up the time of the committee unnecessarily, I shall not insist further. I stand by my protest and am thankful to the minister for the hope he holds out for the future.
Coaticook-armoury, $21,000.


Charles Marcil: Does this complete the work?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


Charles Marcil: What is the total cost?


Robert Rogers: Forty-one thousand dollars.


Charles Marcil: Is there a regiment in Coaticook?


Robert Rogers: I will have to get that information from the Minister of Militia. Surely they would not recommend an armoury if there was no use for it.


Charles Marcil: 
Charles Marcil: Has nothing been done in Gaspe?


Robert Rogers: No; we called for tenders, but on account of the expense we could not go on.


Charles Marcil: Has the site been acquired? Mr. ROGERS: Yes.


Charles Marcil: From whom?


Robert Rogers: Under an Order in Council passed in September, 1912, the purchase of a site was- authorized from the Rev. Father Gauthier, parish priest of Douglas-town and Mr. Isidore Morin, of Gaspe, for $500 and $300 respectively.


Charles Marcil: I might as well bring in my complaint here, I suppose, and I hope the minister will listen to 11 p.m. me. In 1910 I had an estimate put in for a public building in New Carlisle, the county seat of Bonaventure, going on the principle laid down by several Ministers of Public Works that in each constituency there should be a public (building. I thought that in New Carlisle, the county
seat, with a postal revenue from $1,500 to $1,800 and a population of about a thousand more or less, there ought to he a public building. But something happened and it was struck out. And later another item appeared for a public building for Gaspe Basin. I do not know why the vote for the shire town should be left out and a vote put in for Gaspe, for it is a small place of less than three hundred people. I think an injustice is done to New Carlisle, for we had a fair claim to that public building.


Robert Rogers: I appreciate what the
hon. gentleman has said, and apparently from his statement he has a good case. While I cannot promise him that anything will be done immediately, the matter will certainly have consideration later on.
GrancVMere public building, inclusive of 5 per cent interest on balance due on site, $20,000.


Charles Marcil: Will that complete?


Robert Rogers: No. I move that the words "inclusive of 5"per cent interest on balance due on site" be struck out. It was put in by some mistake.


William Pugsley: Nothing has been done there, apparently.


Robert Rogers: No.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Gross Isle quarantine station-new buildings, $150,000.
William Pugsley: That is a very large amount.


Robert Rogers: It is very necessary for work in connection with the Department of Agriculture.
Hull post office-repairs to fence, levelling and sodding grounds, etc., $1,000.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: What has been the delay in this work? It is very necessary.


Robert Rogers: There has been some difference of opinion as to the cost of the work. We do not appear to be able to get value for what we are prepared to spend. But we will make another effort and see if we can get the work carried out.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: Hull is a city of twenty thousand people and-


Robert Rogers: Oh, this is a work that will have to be carried -out.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: It is absolutely necessary; and I think the time has come when the Government should increase the size of the Hull post office to suit the increased popu-

lation. The place is really too small for the needs of the people; the waiting hall should be enlarged.


Robert Rogers: The post office in Hull is a very neat little building but probably too ' small.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: It is a good building, but it should be increased in size.


Robert Rogers: 
Charles Marcil: Has anything been done there?


Robert Rogers: Yes. This completes the contract.


Charles Marcil: How much is the total cost of the building?


Robert Rogers: Thirty-three thousand dollars.


Charles Marcil: What is the population?


Robert Rogers: It is 2,354.


Charles Marcil: That many using this post office? I never heard of it.


Robert Rogers: That is the record before me-that according to the census of 1911, the population was 2,354.
Montreal Postal Station A, St. James street, $160,000.


William Pugsley: Is that the Carslake
property, so-called?


Robert Rogers: Yes.


William Pugsley: In the Montreal Herald of this evening there are some very serious statements with regard to this property. If these statements are true, it appears that an effort has been made to induce the Government to pay a much larger sum for . this property than it is worth. I shall not go into the matter to-night, but I should like the minister to let this item stand, as some gentlemen from Montreal may wish to discuss it.


Robert Rogers: There is no objection to letting the item stand. I should like to say that we have placed -all the correspondence with regard to this (matter on the table of the House, and I (suggest that every hon. gentleman who is interested should read that correspondence. There never was a grosser misrepresentation than that which has appeared in the press from time to time in connection with this property. The best valuators that we could

find in Montreal valued the property at $400,000, ana our officers valued it at the same amount. We made an offer of $325,000, which was refused, and the matter is now before Judge Cassels. We have retained two of the best lawyers in Montreal to see that our evidence is properly presented, and that a fair and proper value is placed upon the property.


William Pugsley: This paper states that
three Montreal real estate dealers- have stated in writing that the property is dear at $190,000.


Robert Rogers: Three of the best real
estate men in Montreal valued the property at from $300,000 to $400,000. The hon. gentleman will nnd full information in the report which has been laid upon the table of the House.
Item stands.
Quebec post office, enlargements and alterations, $200,000.


Charles Marcil: What is the total amount to be expended there?


Robert Rogers: The contract was $385,-
000.


Charles Marcil: Does the postal business
at that office warrant this outlay? I believe that the business has been falling off.


Robert Rogers: Quebec is an important
place, and I take it that the pose office business is increasing rather than falling off.


Charles Marcil: There might be need of
additional postal facilities in the outskirts of Quebec, but I do not think that any are required in this' locality, which, as the hon. gentleman probably knows, is not growing.


Robert Rogers: The revenue for 1912-13
was $185,844, and for 1913-14 $184,362.20.


Charles Marcil: x have given some little
attention to the postal situation in Montreal. A central post office is good in many ways in Montreal, but what is far more useful is sub-stations distributed throughout the district. A central station in the heart of the city is used practically only by those people living or working near it, and I think it would be good policy for the minister to remember in future that if he wants to give real postal facilities to the people he should distribute the stations as much as possible, instead of having one big station in the heart of the city.


Robert Rogers: I think my hon. friend is right in that.

Ste. Agathe des Monts public building, $25,000.


Charles Marcil: Has anything been done
in connection with that?


Robert Rogers: We have been going ahead with the work for some time.
Stanstead Plain public building, $10,000.	[DOT]


Charles Marcil: What would be the total cost of that building?


Robert Rogers: $34,000.
St. Gabriel de Brandon public building, $7,000.


Charles Marcil: What will be the total
cost of that building, and what was the cost of the site?
Mr. ROGERS The site cost $2,000. The contract was for $21,000, exclusive of the site.
St. Jacques de l'Achigan public building, $15,000.


Edmond Proulx: Does the minister intend to go on with this work this year? The hon. member for Montcalm has urged several times that this building be started.


Robert Rogers: We have bought the site.


William Pugsley: That site was bought in 1908. Seven years is a long time to wait for the building.
St. Laurent public building, $5,000.


Charles Marcil: Is that to complete the
work?


Robert Rogers: Yes.
St. Ours public building, $15,000.


Charles Marcil: What will be the total cost there?


Robert Rogers: We hope to keep within the estimate.
Westmount drill hall and armoury, $30,000.


Charles Marcil: Has the site been purchased, or any location decided on?


Robert Rogers: No.
Progress reported.



[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 120, for the relief of Cecil Howard Lambert.-Mr. W. H. Sharpe.
On motion of Mr. Rogers, the House adjourned at 11.23 p.m.
Monday, April 5, 1915.